M ,

( : , , 2015, 75, 7-8, . 376-393)

:
,
.
.
.
, ,
,
, .
? ?
, - .
, ,
.
?
: , , , , ,

1 ( ),
, 1. 2013. . ,
, 15. 2012. .
26. 2011. . -
- ,

, , .
-
, 2 .
.


, . ,
, ,
, .

XVIII
.
, ,
,
.3 (Code
dinstruction criminelle)4 1808. .
1

, , .72/11, 101/11, 121/12, 32/13, 45/13.

, .
.
3
, ., , 1981, , 21.
4
Code dinstruction criminelle . ,
. , ,
.
2

 .
, .
XIX
( 1873. ., 1896. .)5
1895. .
, ,
, .
1897. .
.
, 10. 1865. , 1853. ,
, , ,
.6 1875.
1873. .
1875. .
.

, 1. 1920. .
,
- .
6. 1929, 1. 1930. ,
, .
, , , ,
.

1875.
440 .
, . 7,
.
(. 81. . I 84. I .)8
, , ,
.9
. 10 ,
.
(. 86. . 1 2).11 , ,
. 298. . 2. .
( ).
12
. .
- , ,
. , .
, .
, ,
, .
, , ,
. ,
5

Ibid., 22.
Ibid., 33.
7
,,
, .
.
8
: , ., , , 1899, . , 92.
9
Ibid.
10
, ,, ,
, , .
. . : , .,op. cit.,
148.
11
Ibid., 149.
12
.
6

 , 13, ,
.

, ,
1835. .
1929. ,
. 1929. ,
.
,
( 96).
.14 ,
, , ( 92),
, , ,
.15
.
.
,
, , ,
. ,
. ,
, ,
. .

,
.16 ,
() , , ,
,
, .17

1929.
1929. , ,
.
, , . ,

.
.
. . ,
, ,
. 48
.,
, .
. ,
. ,
, . ,
, ,
.
, ,
, . ,
13

2001..
, ., , , 1937, . , 390.
15
Ibid., 401.
16
, . et al., , 2013, , 693.
17
, ., , , 2014, , 320.
14

 . , ,
18
. ,
,
,
.
,
. 98.
,
,
. . .
,
. ,
328. .
.19 ,
, .
98. , ,

, ,
. , ,
, , .
,
. ,
. ,

, .
, ,
. ,
.

.

, .20
24. 1944. .
, ,
, ,
.21 , 1946. .
1948. , .
, ,
- .
, .
. ,
. 1953.
. ,
18
, ,
, .
. ,
, ,, .
, , , , ,
?,
, ? ,
, , . 211. . 1. . 4. . 211. . 1. . 3.
,
, ,
.
19
, .,op. cit., 403.
20
, .,op. cit., 34.
21
Ibid.

 . , .
, ,
1976. .
(. 136. )
,
( , ) .
,
. (. 145. ).22 ,
, .23
. .
.
. ,
.
, .
, .
,
, , .
1976.
, ,
, .
.24 , ,, ,
.
.
,
, .
, , .
. 2001.
1976. ,

.25 , , ,
, ,
, .

, ,

.
. , ,
.26 , ,
. ,
.
. .
.27
,

.28
, , ,,
, , ,
,

22

: Bayer, V., Jugoslavensko krivino procesno pravo I, Zagreb, 1960, kolska knjiga, 113.
Ibid.,167.
24
: , .,op. cit., 36.
25
, ., 2010.
. , 70, 2010, (12), 560.
26
, .,op. cit., 198.
27
: , .,op. cit., 424.
28
, .,op. cit., 85.
23

 ,
.29 .30
.
, .

. . ,
, , , ,
. . 15. . 2. ,
() . : actori
incubit probatio. .
.
. 17. . 1. 2001. ,
.
.31 ,
, .
, ,
.
,
, , .32
,
. ,
, . ,
, .
, ,
. . ,
, .
res iudicata . ne bis in idem.33
, . 4. (ne bi in idem)
. ,
(. 308),
ne bis in idem.34 , ,
,
.

. 302.

. 302. , ,
, . ,
, .
, ,
,
.
, ,
. .
,, , , ,
,
, (
) . , ,
., , ,
29

Ibid., 86.
: , .,op. cit., ( 183) 85.
31
Brki, S., Krivino procesno pravo I, Novi Sad, 2014, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Novom Sadu, 309.
32
Ili, G., op. cit., 686.
33
Beljanski, V., Istraga. Preuzeto sa: http://www.partners-serbia.org/E-learning/mod/page/view.php?id=110.
34
Ili,G., op. cit., 686.
30

 , .35 . 312. . 3. ,
,
. ,,
, ,
.
.
.36
. ()
(. 5 . 2) (. 296. . 1.
) ,
) . 5. . 2. ,, : 1) ,
,
; 2)
.
) (. 296. . 1),
.
. ,
,
.
. 36. . 2. 37
, .38


.
. ,
. 21. , .
, .
. .
, . . 211. . 1.. 4. .

, . ,
, () 39
.
,
, ,
, ,
. ,
,
.
, ,

.
, . (ABA
ROLI) 2013. ,
. , :
,
.40
.
35

, .,op. cit., 322.

, .,op. cit., 707.
37
, , .98/06.
38
, ., , , 2014, 78, (78),
36

413.
39

, . , LVI, 910.2010, 774.

, (2013). , American Bar Associoation Rule of Law Iniative (ABA
ROLI), 2013, 60.
40

 , ,
. ,
, , .41

.
.
. 1929. , 2011. ,
, , ,
, .
. 2011.

.
, , .

,
.
, , , ,
, ,
, . ,
,
.
,
, , ,
.

, , American Bar Associoation Rule of Law Iniative (ABA

ROLI), 2013.
Bayer, V., Jugoslavensko krivino procesno pravo I, Zagreb, 1960, kolska knjiga.
, ., . : http://www.partners-serbia.org/E-learning/mod/page/view.php?id=110.
, ., I, , 2014, .
, ., , 1981, .
, ., 2010.
. , 2010, 70, (12).
, ., . , 2014, 78,
(78).
, , . 72/11, 101/11, 121/12, 32/13, 45/13.
, . et al., , 2013, .
, ., , , 1937, . .
, ., , , 1899, . .
, ., . LVI, 910, 2010.
, , . 98/06.
, ., , , 2014, .

41

Ibid., 61.

DEVELOPMENT PATHS OF THE INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES AND INVESTIGATION IN OUR LEGAL

SYSTEM FROM THE SECOND HALF OF THE 19th CENTURY TILL PRESENT,
WITH AN INSIGHT INTO THE RIGHTS OF THE DEFENDANTS
Petar Cvetkovic, MA
Attorney at Law in Novi Sad
Summary
Through this paper the author presents some of the features of prosecutorial model of investigation which has been adopted in the
Republic of Serbia, that is all together with an overview of the development path of the investigation procedures in Europe in general, and also
in the Republic of Serbia and the countries of which Serbia became the legal successor. The paper starts from the moment of the introduction of
the mixed system in investigative proceedings on the European continent. Along with the development of the investigation presented are also
the positions of the defendants and the scope of the rights they had, depending on the historic moment. Addressed as well are the issues that we
believe are not well enough regulated in the current Criminal Procedure Code, primarily when it comes to the rights of the accused people, and
we are attempting to determine the connection, taking into account the historical background of the position of the defendant, and we are
looking for the answer when it was the hardest of times for the defendant and whether it is now easy for those people. In this paper we also
look into the meaning of abandoning the principle of material truth and whether the current Criminal Procedure Code can survive without it
and how the authorities in general will technically apply the Criminal Procedure Code, as it represents a combination of adversarial and
European continental legal system. The equality of both parties is essential only in principle, but in truth inquisitorial elements are permeating,
while insisting on some form of passivity of the court while giving large opportunities to one party, which has the burden of proving things. Is
this a step backwards or is it about the long jump?
Keywords: investigation, inquest, formal order of investigation, the principle of material truth, adversarial process