Execution of the “House Arrest”: Issues in Practice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47152/ziksi2023310Keywords:
house arrest, alternative criminal sanctions, execution issues when implementing “house arrest”, possible resolutionsAbstract
Imposition of imprisonment served in the premises where the convicted individual resides (called “house arrest”) emerges as one of the most prevalent alternative criminal sanctions in the practice of domestic courts, especially following the recent amendments to the Criminal Code, significantly reducing the possibility of imposing conditional sentences. The specificity of this sanction lies in the execution of the imprisonment itself, as it does not represent a separate punishment but a distinct manner of executing an unconditional prison sentence. This execution does not take place in a prison facility but rather in the premises where the convicted person resides, typically more favourable for the convicted individual. However, “house arrest”, although a form of executing a prison sentence, differs significantly from “conventional imprisonment” and, due to its characteristics, constitutes a sui generis form of deprivation of liberty. Despite the numerous advantages of this specific method of executing a prison sentence, categorised as an alternative criminal sanction based on its characteristics, significant problems arise in practice when implementing “house arrest”, especially during the initiation of its execution. The legislator has not precisely regulated this process, often leading to the impossibility of commencing its execution. Additionally, it is essential to note the reduced ability to monitor the offender's rehabilitation during the execution of “house arrest” compared to conventional imprisonment. In the latter, the offender serves the prison sentence in penal conditions, precisely within a specialised institution for the execution of prison sentences. The aim of this paper is to highlight the identified problems during the execution of this external criminal sanction in the practice of courts and to provide possible solutions to the problems occurring during the implementation of “house arrest”.
References
Bejatović, S. (2018). Alternativne krivične sankcije i regionalna krivična zakonodavstva (osnovna zakonska obeležja i iskustva u primeni – sličnosti i razlike). U S. Bejatović & I. Jovanović (Ur.), Alternativne krivične sankcije (regionalna krivična zakonodavstva, iskustva u primeni i mere unapređenja) (str. 9–29). Misija OEBS-a u Srbiji.
Drakić, D., & Milić, I. (2020). Izricanje i izvršenje kazne zatvora koja se izvršava u prostorijama u kojima osuđeni stanuje (tzv. kućni zatvor). Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, 54(3), 999–1022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfns54-29378
Gainey, R. R., & Payne, B. K. (2000). Understanding the experience of house arrest with electronic monitoring: An analysis of quantitative and qualitative data. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44(1), 84–96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X00441008
Hurwitz, J. N. (1987). House arrest: A critical analysis of an intermediate-level penal sanction. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 135(3), 771–811. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3312081
Ignjatović, Đ. M. (2013). Normativno uređenje izvršenja vanzavodskih krivičnih sankcija u Srbiji. CRIMEN – časopis za krivične nauke, 4(2), 144–175.
Lazarević, L. V. (2011). Komentar Krivičnog zakonika (2. izmenjeno i dopunjeno izdanje). Pravni fakultet Univerziteta Union.
Mrvić-Petrović, N. (2012). Kad vlastiti dom postane zatvor (izazovi primene kućnog zatvaranja kao zamene za kaznu zatvora). U L. Kron (Ur.), Delikt, kazna i mogućnosti socijalne profilakse (str. 81–94). Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja.
Mrvić-Petrović, N. (2017). Krivično pravo: Opšti deo (4. izmenjeno izdanje). Pravni fakultet Univerziteta Union u Beogradu; Službeni glasnik.
Satzger, H. (2019). The harmonisation of criminal sanctions in the European Union: A new approach. Eucrim: The European Criminal Law Associations’ Forum, 2, 115–120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30709/eucrim-2019-007
Stojanović, Z. (2012). Kaznena politika u Srbiji: Sukob zakonodavca i sudske prakse. U Đ. Ignjatović (Ur.), Kaznena reakcija u Srbiji (II deo) (str. 1–17). Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Stojanović, Z. (2020). Kazneni rasponi i represivnost krivičnog zakonodavstva. CRIMEN – časopis za krivične nauke, 11(1), 3–33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/crimen2001003S
Škulić, M. (2018). Kućni zatvor (samostalna kazna ili način izvršenja kazne zatvora?). U S. Bejatović & I. Jovanović (Ur.), Alternativne krivične sankcije (regionalna krivična zakonodavstva, iskustva u primeni i mere unapređenja) (str. 31–57). Misija OEBS-a u Srbiji.
Tešović, O. (2018). Alternativne krivične sankcije u krivičnom pravu Republike Srbije (doktorska disertacija, Univerzitet u Beogradu). NaRDuS.
Council of Europe. (2010). Recommendation CM/Rec on the Council of Europe Probation Rules.
Krivični zakonik. (2019). Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, br. 85/2005, 88/2005 – ispr., 107/2005 – ispr., 72/2009, 111/2009, 121/2012, 104/2013, 108/2014, 94/2016 i 35/2019.
United Nations. (1990). Standard minimum rules for non-custodial measures (The Tokyo Rules).
Zakon o izvršenju krivičnih sankcija. (2019). Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, br. 55/2014 i 35/2019.
Zakon o izvršenju vanzavodskih sankcija i mera. (2018). Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, br. 55/2014 i 87/2018.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright over their published works and grant the publisher a non-exclusive right to publish the article, to be identified as its first publisher in cases of reuse, and to distribute it in all forms and media. The articles will be distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution International (CC BY 4.0) license, unless otherwise stated.
