576 KB74 KB2025Briški, LoraMihelj Plesničar, Mojcaštevilka:1letnik:76str. 5-18ISSN:0034-690XCOBISSID_HOST:231342851URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-N1K87RS4slMinistrstvo za notranje zadeve Republike Slovenije, PolicijaRevija za kriminalistiko in kriminologijochange in punishmentkaznovalna politikalegal changepenal policyprepovedano prehajanje državne mejeprohibited crossing of the state border and territorypunishmentsprememba kaznovanjasprememba zakonaMedigra zakonodajalca in sodišč pri oblikovanju kaznovalne politike| analiza začetnih učinkov spremembe prepovedanega prehajanja meje ali ozemlja države v kazenski zakonodaji|A criminal sanction is shaped through a series of stages in which decisions are undertaken by different decision-makers at different levels. This article focuses on the interplay between the legislature and the courts in the formulation of sentencing policy, where the authors examine how changes in the statutory sentencing range impacts sentencing at the judiciary level. They examine the case of an amendment to the Slovenian Criminal Code from 2020, which significantly increased the statutory sentencing range for one of the offence types for the crime of Prohibited crossing of the state border and territory. The analysis is based on examibing a dataset of final criminal judgments decided in all eleven Slovenian courts before and immediately after the amendment came into force. The data collected show that, before the amendment, the Slovenian courts did not impose sentences from the upper half of the sentencing range. The legislature’s decision to harshen the sentencing framework for this offence was not based on practical issues, but rather on a specific aim of changing crime and penal policy. On the other hand, an analysis of the first post-amendment sentencing reactions immediately after the amendment was enacted reveals two opposing responses in judicial and prosecutorial practice: the adaptation of sentencing to the normative change in some aspects (a significant shift towards custodial sentences as opposed to conditional sentences, resulting in the increase in the average length of imprisonment) as well as the resistance to the same change in other aspects (the limited dispersion of sentences across the statutory sentencing range)Kazenska sankcija se oblikuje v več fazah, v katerih odločitve sprejemajo različni odločevalci na različnih stopnjah. Članek se osredotoča na medigro zakonodajalca in sodišč pri oblikovanju kaznovalne politike. Avtorici raziskujeta, kako sprememba v zakonskem kaznovalnem razponu vpliva na kaznovanje na sodiščih. Osredotočita se na novelo slovenskega kazenskega zakonika iz leta 2020, ki je občutno povečala zakonski kaznovalni okvir za eno od modalitet kaznivega dejanja prepovedanega prehajanja meje ali ozemlja države. Analiza temelji na vzorcu pravnomočnih kazenskih sodb enajstih slovenskih okrožnih sodišč pred veljavnostjo novele in neposredno po njej. Zbrani podatki kažejo, da pred novelo slovenska sodišča niso izrekala sankcij z zgornje polovice kaznovalnega razpona. Zakonodajalčeva odločitev, da postroži kaznovalni okvir za to kaznivo dejanje, ni temeljila na praktičnih vprašanjih, temveč je bila sprejeta z namenom spremeniti kaznovalno politiko oziroma s spremembo zagroziti z namenom odvračanja. Analiza prvih kaznovalnih odzivov neposredno po noveli po drugi strani kaže dva nasprotujoča si odziva v sodniški in tožilski praksi: prilagoditev kaznovanja normativni spremembi v nekaterih vidikih (premik k zapornim kaznim, povečanje povprečne dolžine zaporne kazni) in delno zavračanje te spremembe (omejena razpršenost kazni po zakonskem kaznovalnem razponu)TEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia