Рехабилитација лица осуђених из политичких или идеолошких разлога и њене правне последице

Abstract

Rehabilitacija kao pojam u pravu, izuzetno je slojevita i višeznačna. Tako je, jedan od ciljeva ove disertacije upravo sagledavanje upotrebe termina rehabilitacija, prevashodno u krivičnom pravu, uz nastojanje da se instituti koji se isto nazivaju, međusobno uporede i raščlane. U tradicionalnom smislu pod rehabilitacijom se podrazumevaju dva instituta koji pripadaju krivičnom materijalnom odnosno krivičnom procesnom pravu, te treća, nešto novijeg porekla, rehabilitacija lica osuđenih iz političkih ili ideoloških razloga. U disertaciji se obrađuju pitanja pravnih posledica osude, ali i upisa osude u kaznene evidencije, te njihovo brisanje odnosno poništavanje rehabilitacijom. Takođe, radi diferencijacije u odnosu na specijalnu, odvojeno su analizirane redovna i vanredna, kao u teoriji krivičnog prava tradicionalni pojmovi rehabilitacije osnovano, odnosno neosnovano osuđenih lica. Treći i četvrti deo rada posvećeni su specijalnoj rehabilitaciji osuđenih iz političkih ili ideoloških razloga. U trećem delu obrađuju se uporednopravni i međunarodnopravni aspekti specijalne rehabilitacije na evropskom kontinentu, sa kojim naš pravni sistem uglavnom deli srodnu pravnu tradiciju, ali ovde značajnije od toga, deli i zajedničko istorijsko iskustvo iz perioda totalitarizma. Četvrti deo bavi se specijalnom rehabilitacijom u srpskom pravu, odvojeno posmatrajući rešenja prvog i drugog zakona o rehabilitaciji. Poslednji deo rada posvećen je upravo istraživanju sudske prakse specijalne rehabilitacije, koje je obuhvatilo ukupno 4.189 rešenja o specijalnoj rehabilitaciji, koja se odnose na 5.402 lica. Uzorak je obuhvatio rešenja, sa manjim ili većim odstupanjima, svih sudova na teritoriji Srbije u periodu od 2006. do 2016. godine, obuhvatajući svih deset godina primene dva zakona o specijalnoj rehabilitaciji. Širi, društveni značaj zaključaka o rehabilitaciji lica osuđenih iz političkih ili ideoloških razloga ogleda se u činjenici da svi nosioci vlasti moraju imati u vidu da zloupotreba prava u cilju ustanovljavanja vlasti jedne ideologije, ne može biti solidan temelj države. Krivično pravo je moćan mehanizam, ali se upravo zato mora voditi računa kako se koristi, i u kojoj meri je podobno sredstvo za svojevrsnu reviziju istorije. Unapređenjem i poboljšavanjem procesa rehabilitacije lica osuđenih iz političkih ili ideoloških razloga suzbija se političko manihejstvo i potencijalno usporava lanac podela u društvu koje razaraju srpsko nacionalno biće.

Rehabilitation as a legal concept is extremely complex and multifaceted. Consequently, one of the goals of this dissertation is to grasp the meaning of the term rehabilitation, primarily within the criminal law context, and in doing so to try to examine and dissect various legal terms that are often given similar meaning. Traditionally, the rehabilitation refers to two principles of substantive and procedural criminal law, and as the third, to the rehabilitation of a person convicted for political or ideological reasons. In terms, here we makes the distinction between ordinary, extraordinary, and special rehabilitation. The ordinary rehabilitation refers to rehabilitation of justly convicted persons, after certain period of time has lapsed, since the time they have served their punishment, provided they have improved their behavior. The term extraordinary, rehabilitation refers to rehabilitation of person wrongfully convicted or detained. The term special rehabilitation is defined as annulment, based on a special law, of a court or administrative decision that served as a basis for conviction or deprivation of rights of a person for political or ideological reasons, or declaration that a person was deprived of rights without a decision of a state organ. The scope of application of the special rehabilitation is very wide and uncharted. First of all, the very legal nature of this type of rehabilitation is completely undefined, hence, causing considerable confusion among the legal profession, and leaving the general public entirely bemused. A completely distorted impression surrounds rehabilitation of political convicts, not only among general public, but also among the legal profession, and even within academic circles, which is even more dangerous. A wrong image was created, most likely due to rehabilitation of several well-known political convicts that the rehabilitation means to rehabilitate the figure and work, i.e. political activities, of a certain individual. We are of the opinion that a completely wrong perception of the goals, as well as, the possibilities of the special rehabilitation was created and that is fully reflects the fact that the lawmakers where not sure themselves about the legal nature and certain aspects of this special rehabilitation. It seems that jurisprudence, as well as courts desperately need answers to numerous questions concerning this type of rehabilitation, and legal principles associated with it. This dissertation covers issues of legal consequences of conviction, registration of conviction in a person’s criminal record, and the expungement or annulment by means of rehabilitation, of such conviction. Also, in order to differentiate special rehabilitation from other types of rehabilitation, we have offered a separate analysis of the ordinary and extraordinary rehabilitation, as the latter two are traditionally associated with rehabilitation of justly and generally wrongfully convicted persons. The third and fourth chapter of this dissertation are dedicated to the special rehabilitation of persons convicted for political and ideological reasons. The third chapter deals with comparative and international law aspects of the special rehabilitation in Europe, since our legal system shares, to a considerable extent, common legal tradition with the rest of the European continent, as well as, a common historic experience of the totalitarian period. In the fourth chapter, we explored the special rehabilitation in the Serbian legal system by providing distinct analysis of norms of the first and the second law on rehabilitation. The final chapters of this dissertation are dedicated to the research of case law dealing with the special rehabilitation. The research covered 4.189 decisions on special rehabilitation that involved 5.402 persons. The research sample included decisions, with minor deviations, from all the courts within the territory of the Republic of Serbia in the period between 2006 and 2016, thereby covering the entire ten-year period of application of two laws regulating special rehabilitation. Each rehabilitation decision was examined based on more than fifty criteria. Consequently, the research provides data, concerning persons seeking rehabilitation, i.e. composition of rehabilitated persons based on various personal criteria; moreover shows the time, place and organ of a political conviction; regulations and specific criminal and other offences on which the conviction rests; criminal sanctions that were used, etc. Wider, social significance of a decision on rehabilitation of a person convicted for political or ideological reasons lies in a fact that all agents entrusted with governmental authority must bear in mind that miscarriage of justice with a purpose of establishing government of a certain ideology does not serve as a solid cornerstone on which the state may be founded. Criminal law is a powerful mechanism, and it is precisely for that reason that it must be used cautiously and to the extent, it is an appropriate mechanism to serve the process of revision of history. By advancing and improving the process of rehabilitation of persons convicted for political and ideological reasons, we curb the political Manichaeism and potentially slow down the process of division that is eroding the Serbian society.