Magazine Státní zastupitelství 1/2014

JUDr. Lumír Crha, státní zástupce, Nejvyšší státní zastupitelství, email: crha@nsz.brn.justice.cz

The paper summarizes views of the legal theory on the purpose of punishment. It deals with the retribution and utilitarian theories, and concludes that only mixed theories can be successfully implemented in practice. Furthermore, the author focuses on the issue of imprisonment in the Czech legislation. He believes that the purpose of this punishment changes in time. Therefore, he envisages it as a dynamic process. He concludes that the prosecutor as a body active in criminal proceedings must deal with the purpose of punishment according to both the retribution and utilitarian theories. However, when he controls the observance of legal regulations in places of imprisonment he can deal with the purpose of punishment only from the point of view of the utilitarian theory.

JUDr. Filip Ščerba, Ph.D., odborný asistent, Katedra trestního práva Právnické fakulty Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci, email: filip.scerba@upol.cz (pohled akademika)
JUDr. Michael Vrtek, Ph.D., předseda senátu Krajského soudu v Brně, email: MVrtek@vsoud.olc.justice.cz (pohled soudce)
JUDr. Jan Lata, Ph.D., státní zástupce OTŘ, Nejvyšší státní zastupitelství, email: lata@nsz.brn.justice.cz (pohled státního zástupce)
PhDr. Andrea Matoušková, vedoucí oddělení pro koncepce, analýzy a metodiky, Probační a mediační služba, email: amatouskova@pms.justice.cz (pohled pracovnice Probační a mediační služby)
Mgr. Michal Petras, odbor výkonu vazby a trestu, Generální ředitelství Vězeňské služby ČR, email: MPetras@grvs.justice.cz (pohled pracovníka Vězeňské služby)

The paper presents views of different legal professionals, such as academicians, judges, public prosecutors and probation and mediation officials on the effectiveness of various kinds of alternative sanctions and on ways to effectively replace prison sentences by alternative sanctions. The question is though, whether the exerted effort to impose the lowest possible number of prison sentences does not paradoxically result in a higher degree of recidivism, especially when alternative punishment is insufficiently monitored.

Mgr. et Mgr. Lucie Boledovičová, Katedra trestního práva, Právnická fakulta MU, email: 170103@mail.muni.cz

This paper deals with the forms of house arrest embedded in the legislation of the Czech Republic and England and Wales. Furthermore, the paper focuses on the procedure of the execution of house arrest in the chosen states and the means of securing its control. It compares the individual phases of the execution of house arrest (its initiation, the actual control and the termination based on arrest).

Přemysl Polák, státní zástupce MO, Nejvyšší státní zastupitelství, email: polak@nsy.brn.justice.cz
Miroslav Kubíček, mezinárodní právní odbor, Ministerstvo zahraničních věcí, email: Miroslav_Kubicek@mzv.cz

On 1 January 2014, the new Act on International Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters will come into force. The Act introduces a number of changes in the existing procedures (in the areas of extradition, recognition and enforcement of foreign decisions, cooperation with international criminal courts and tribunals, etc.) as well as new types of cooperation (under recent EU instruments). A Commentary on the new Act by Přemysl Polák and Miroslav Kubíček, who both participated in drafting the new Act, will be published by Wolters Kluwer publishing house to help practitioners with orientation in the new Act and the new challenges it will bring. The article provides a sample of the Commentary on some of the most important issues brought by the new Act (relation of the Act to the Criminal Procedure Code and to international treaties, order public clause, dual criminality and competence of Czech courts and prosecutors in mutual legal assistance when the Czech Republic is the requested state, abolition of international arrest warrants, the possibility to seek extradition of a suspect, rule of specialty, new conditions for transfer of criminal proceedings to a foreign country, etc.).

Mgr. Milan Šimek, státní zástupce, Krajské státní zastupitelství Hradec Králové, email: msimek@ksz.hrk.justice.cz
JUDr. Jana Zezulová, Ph.D., státní zástupkyně ALO, Nejvyšší státní zastupitelství, email: zezulova@nsz.brn.justice.cz

The paper focuses on the analysis of the institute of juvenile insanity from the point of view of a public prosecutor. The authors attempt to assess a ten-year-long experience in the application of this institute. They elaborate on the prevailing problem areas which include especially the question whether the state of a certain degree of intellectual and moral maturity should be understood as a special kind of sanity, or if it can be taken as an individual condition of criminal responsibility. The authors lay the emphasis on a careful differentiation between a general and the so-called relative juvenile insanity. To illustrate the problem they present a case study on the basis of which they try to formulate questions for experts to clarify the level of the intellectual and moral juvenile maturity.