Rehabilitacija, svemu uprkos
Rehabilitation, Despite Everything

Summary/Abstract: The Rehabilitation Act (2006) gives the victim of political repression the right to have his sentence pronounced invalid and consequently to be considered not convicted. When the person was convicted without passing a decision the rehabilitation entails the determination that the person in question was a victim for political reasons. It does not contain the rehabilitation in the wide sense, in the form of restitution of pecuniary punishment, confiscated property, damages for damaged health or terminated career, acknowledgement of years spent in prison in the years of service etc (1st part of the paper). The statute that has been long awaited brought many legal uncertainties and different unconstitutional provisions: it does not contain the rehabilitation criterion (3); it does not define the state authorities whose decisions may be the basis for rehabilitation (4); it does not define the type of the proceeding (8) nor the possibility of incomplete rehabilitation (9); it unlawfully discriminates the victims on the basis of their previous residence (6); it enables the rehabilitation against the victim's wishes as well as the publication of his or her name and data against the right to privacy (7); it insults the previous and existing judiciary by determining the superfluous possibility to review the decisions of the post authoritarian regime as well as those of the authoritarian regime (5). The legal uncertainty and unconstitutionalism (2) was the result after the long time period of waiting for justice. Gross negligence of the legislator brought a shadow to the legally and ethically undisputable institution of rehabilitation. The oxymoronic appearance of the statute long time in the making but still not adopted made its life dependable on the case law. The courts possess a capacity to remove the deficiencies of the statue (10.a), while, when it concerns the other deficiencies it could be done at the price of the unlawful life of the statute (through case law in accordance with the purpose of the institute of rehabilitation, but contra legem). However, the court did not show the readiness for this; thus the statue is returned to its creator with the unpostponable order to amend it (10.b).

• Details
• Contents