169 KB43 KB2012Ambrož, Matjažštevilka:3letnik:63str. 191-198ISSN:0034-690XCOBISSID:1589582URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-IGVHL0ZVslMinistrstvo za notranje zadeve Republike Slovenije, PolicijaRevija za kriminalistiko in kriminologijodual criminalitydvojna kaznivostenforcement of sentencesEUEvropska unijaizvrševanje kazenskih sankcijobsojencipogojni odpustprobationresocialisationresocializacijatransfer obsojencevtransfer of convictsTransfer zapornikov znotraj EU - res v imenu socialne reintegracije?|The transfer of the enforcement of sentences between states raises many penological, legal, political and financial questions. The traditional system of transfer based on tripartite consent (consent of the state of the judgement, the state of enforcement and state of the convict) is undergoing change: instead, a system allowing transfer against the will of the convict is being introduced, which requires states to enforce the sentence imposed on their citizens by foreign courts, in some cases even without verifying dual criminality. At the EU level, these changes are being justified by the provision of the optimum opportunities for social rehabilitation (resocialisation) of the convict; however, much more mundane reasons lie behind this justification: countries with a high percentage of foreigners in their prison populations would like to be partly relieved of this burden, quickly and without administrative complications, if possible. In numerous cases, the transfer of convicts to serve sentences in their country of origin is in the prisoners' interests, but not invariably (e.g. worse living conditions in the prisons of the country to which they have been transfer red,longer waits for probation). Therefore, shifts in the field of transfer can be seen, at least from one perspective, as sacrificing the convicts' position on the altar of the rhetoric of mutual recognition of judicial decisions and the provision of optimum opportunities for the resocialisation of convictsPrenos izvršitve kazenske sankcije med državami odpira številna penološka, pravna, politična pa tudi finančna vprašanja. Tradicionalni sistem transferja, ki je temeljil na tripartitnem soglasju (soglasju države obsodbe, države izvršitve in obsojenca), doživlja spremembe: na njegovo mesto stopa sistem, ki omogoča transfer proti volji obsojenca, državam pa nalaga dolžnost, da izvršijo sankcije, ki so jih njihovim državljanom izrekla tuja sodišča, v nekaterih primerih tudi brez preverjanja dvojne kaznivosti. Na ravni EU se te spremembe opravičujejo z zagotavljanjem kar najboljših možnosti za socialno rehabilitacijo (resocializacijo) obsojenca, v ozadju te fraze pa je mogoče videti veliko bolj mundane razloge: interes držav z visokim odstotkom tujcev v zaporniški populaciji, da bi se tega bremena delnorazbremenile, po možnosti hitro in brez administrativnih zapletov. V številnih primerih je premestitev obsojenca na prestajanje kazenske sankcije v državo njegovega porekla res v njegovem interesu, ni pa vselej tako (npr. slabši bivalni standard v zaporih države, v katero je bil premeščen, dolgotrajnejše čakanje na pogojni odpust). Zato je na premike na področju transferja vsaj v enem delu mogoče gledati tudi kot na žrtvovanje položaja obsojencev na oltarju retorike o vzajemnem priznavanju sodnih odločb in zagotavljanju najboljših možnosti za resocializacijo obsojencevTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia