Kazna kao instrument državne reakcije na kriminalitet i predstojeće izmene u Krivičnom zakoniku Srbije

Abstract

After the adoption of the Criminal Code, the system of punishment in the criminal legislation of Serbia has met the standards that exist in other European countries. Despite certain changes and amendments in recent years, which are in line with the strengthening of retributivism, we

point out that their main focus is still utilitarian, i.e. justification for the reform is in social utility. Punishment is necessary in combating crime and without it criminal law is inconceivable. The

analysis in the paper includes the changes and amendments to the Criminal Code that dealt with

the system of punishment, as well as certain provisions relating to sentencing, which have also been

affected by the reform of the criminal legislation, namely: the prohibition of reducing the punishment for certain crimes, hate as required aggravating circumstance, the issue of more strict punishments as exceptional way of sentencing. Taking stand in relation to the new provisions also required

a criminal-political assessment of the usefulness of the new provisions in combating crime, as well

as consideration of certain legal matters based on which the author gave suggestions de lege ferenda

for their improvement and development. The author first analyzes the basic postulates of the Criminal Code of 2005 relating to the system of punishment, and then the provisions that were the subject of changes and amendments in 2009 and 2012 (changes and amendments to the Criminal Code

of 2013 were not related to criminal sanctions). Given that the part concerning criminal sanctions

in criminal legislation represents a broad field, especially the part that refers to the concept and

types of punishments and sentencing, and that it is more often studied as an independent field, it is

clear that it is a very significant part of the Criminal Code. Research of this field can be approached

from different aspects: legal and philosophical, social, etc., however, this time, the legal-dogmatic

approach prevails with the addition of other methods, especially when it comes to certain debates for and against certain types of penalties.