| Abstract [eng] |
The institute of refusal to begin a pre-trial investigation is analysed in this master’s thesis while examining both the significant legal acts and the interpretation provided in case law, as well as the conclusions made in the doctrine by scholars. The discussion of the pre-trial investigation and the moment of its beginning is important for the disclosure of the concept of the object of this work. The protection of every individual and society as a whole from criminal attacks is accented, therefore the beginning of a pre-trial investigation is held as a priority and the refusal to begin a pre-trial investigation is possible only in exceptional cases. The regulation of the beginning of a pre-trial investigation and the refusal to begin a pre-trial investigation in 1961 CPC, which was relevant until 2003, May 1st entry into force of the CPC, is discussed. The refusal to begin a pre-trial investigation is regulated in Article 168 of the CPC, which has been in force since 2003 and is once of the most changed articles in the section which regulates the general conditions of a pre-trial investigation. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the grounds for refusing to initiate a pre-trial investigation while striving to discuss, in as much detail as possible, each of the circumstances in which such a decision is possible. Statistics of a three-year period, related to decisions of refusing to start a pre-trial investigation, are discussed. An extremely high number of surveys has been analysed. This paper analyses the decision to initiate a pre-trial investigation, the importance of motivating such a decision and the ways of appealing such a decision, which allows a person to defend himself from an unmotivated refusal to begin a pre-trial investigation. The last park of the work examines the regulation of the refusal to initiate a pre-trial investigation in foreign countries. |
