Abstract
In this paper, the author analyses criminal procedural rules created as an expression of the synthesis of the common-law accusatorial and the continental mixed criminal procedural justice system in International Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The field of analytical treatment in this paper is limited not only to textual material of criminal procedural rules, but the author also attempts to demonstrate the practical achievements and implications of criminal procedural institutes. Furthermore, the reasons of these synthesis are revealed and categorized into those caused by the practical need to make the process faster and more efficient (justified by the right to an expeditious trial), and those originating from the flexible adaptation of procedural rules to the legal habits and type of education of lawyers who are referred to the application of the rules. The aim of the paper is to point out the practical consequences of the criminal procedure roles and to outline their practical achievements, depending on the underlying factors. This goal is of great practical importance, considering that legal theory in this area has no influence on establishing criminal procedural rules, but it is also out of step with the critical analysis of some criminal procedural law institutes that are gradually being transferred from the ICTY to other international or national criminal procedure rules. The selected issue has been fairly neglected in our literature, although actualized in recent amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure of Serbia. By these changes, the continental type of mixed system of criminal procedure has been replaced by the model inspired by Anglo-American criminal procedural law.
Highlights
The author analyses criminal procedural rules created as an expression of the synthesis of the common-law accusatorial and the continental mixed criminal procedural justice system in International Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY)
The field of analytical treatment in this paper is limited to textual material of criminal procedural rules, but the author attempts to demonstrate the practical achievements and implications of criminal procedural institutes. The reasons of these synthesis are revealed and categorized into those caused by the practical need – to make the process faster and more efficient, and those originating from the flexible adaptation of procedural rules to the legal habits and type of education of lawyers who are referred to the application of the rules
The aim of the paper is to point out the practical consequences of the criminal procedure roles and to outline their practical achievements, depending on the underlying factors
Summary
Pitanje dužine trajanja postupka je od esencijalnog značaja za sintezu procesnih instituta. Čak postoji veliki broj primera koji potvrđuju da su se postupci dodatno zakomplikovali budući da se učesnici u njima nisu dovoljno dobro snalazili u svojim novim ulogama.[34] Nezavisno od toga, sva odstupanja od čistih modela koja su inspirisana potrebom ubrzavanja postupaka uglavnom su dovela do oštrih kritika stručne javnosti. Kao što smo videli na primeru Pravilnika MKTJ, rešenje po kome se neka svedočenja mogu uzeti čak iako nisu data viva voce ili odsustvo prava na naknadu štete zbog neosnovano određenog pritvora pretrpela. Koja je dovela do procesne sinteze, ne možemo izneti nikakav jasan zaključak o tome da li je doprinela efikasnijim postupcima, budući da neprestano moramo preispitivati da li je smanjenje komplikovanosti jednog segmenta postupka prouzrokovalo komplikovanost nekog drugog segmenta i da li se smanjenje komplikovanosti određenog segmenta postupka uopšte može poistovetiti sa efikasnošću postupka, tako da se tu stalno nalazimo u jednom circulus vitiosus
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
