Prosecution in the criminal courts of Croatia is examined in the context of the inquisitorial model of criminal justice and of the ideology and political structure of socialist Yugoslavia. The communal court of Zagreb, the republic's capital, was the site of observations and interviews. Particular attention is paid to the role of the investigative judge and his relationship to the prosecution process. Comparisons are made to prosecution in the United States.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bayer, V.
(1982/1986). Jugoslavensko krivicno procesno pravo [Yugoslav law of criminal procedure] (Vols. 1-2). Zagreb, Yugoslavia: Pravni fakultet.
2.
Bogdanovic, P.
(1954). O mestu i ulozi istraznog sudije u krivicom postupku [On the position and role of the investigating judge in criminal procedure]. Pravni Zivot, 4-5.
3.
Brncic, J.
(1948). Azdaci javnog tuziostova i njegov odnos prema ostalim drzavnim organima [The purpose of the Public Prosecution and its relation to other state authorities]. Nasa Zakonitost, 8-10.
4.
Carter, L.
(1974). Limits of order. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
5.
Cole, G. F.
(1970). The decision to prosecute. Law and Society Review, 4, 313.
6.
Cole, O. F.
, Frankowski, S., & Gertz, M. (Eds.). (1987). Major criminal justice systems (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
7.
Cole, G. F.
, & Sanders, A. (1981). Criminal prosecution in England: Evolution and change. Connecticut Law Review, 14, 1.
8.
Damaska, M. R.
(1969). Foreword. Collection of Yugoslav laws. Belgrade, Yugoslavia: Institute of Comparative Law.
9.
Damaska, M. R.
(1986). The faces of justice and state authority. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10.
David, R.
, & Brierley, J. E. (1968). Major legal systems in the world today. London: Free Press.
11.
George, B. J.
(1984). Discretionary authority of public prosecutors in Japan. Law in Japan, 17, 42.
12.
Grosman, B.
(1969). The prosecutor. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
13.
Hayden, R. M.
(1986). Popular use of Yugoslav labor courts and the contradiction of social courts. Law and Society Review, 20(2), 229-251.
14.
Hermann, J.
(1974). The role of compulsory prosecution and the scope of prosecutorial discretion in Germany. University of Chicago Law Review, 41, 468.
15.
Johnson, E. L.
(1968). An introduction to the Soviet legal system. London: Methuen.
16.
Lithner, K.
(1983). Aklagararbete Och Aklagarroll [The prosecutor's work and role]. Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm University.
17.
Loncarevic, D.
(1984). O nekim primjedbama na rad i ulogu javnog tuzilstva [About some objections on the work and role of the Office of Public Prosecution]. Nasa Zakonitost, 3, 360.
18.
Moody, S. R.
, & Tombs, J. (1982). Prosecution in the public interest. Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish Academic Press.
19.
Siomic-Jekic, Z.
(1983). Krivichno procesno pravo SFRJ [The law of criminal procedure of SFRY]. Belgrade, Yugoslavia: Privredna stampa.
20.
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
. (1974). Constitution. Belgrade, Yugoslavia: Author.
21.
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
. (1976). Code of criminal procedure. Belgrade, Yugoslavia: Author.
22.
Szabo, I.
, & Peteri, Z. (1977). A socialist approach to law. Budapest, Hungary: Akademiai Kaido.
23.
Vasiljevic, T.
(1981). Sistem krivicnog procesnog prava SFRJ [The system of the law of criminal procedure of SFRY]. Belgrade, Yugoslavia: Savremena administracija.
24.
Vivoda, M.
(1950). Nastankak I razvoj javnog tuziostva u NR Sloveniji u toku oslobodilackog rata i narodne revolucije [The genesis and development of public prosecution in the People's Republic of Slovenia during the War for Liberation and People's Revolution]. Archiv za Pravne i Drustvene Nauka, 1.
25.
Vjestacenjc uskladiti s potrebama pravosuda [Expertise should be coordinated with the needs of the system of justice]
. (1988). Delegatski vjesnik, 440, 8.
