Uslovni otpust u kaznenom zakonodavstvu Srbije

The changes in the criminal legislature of Serbia have necessarily been reflected on the conditional release too. Coordination with international standards has caused the enlargement of the length of the served imprisonment after which one can demand the conditional release, but it has also pointed at the lack of coordination with the regulations of the European convention on human rights. It is necessary to introduce time-limits within which the requests for the conditional release must be solved. Then, one must differentiate whether it is only a possibility or the right to the conditional release. With the introduction of clearer criteria on the grounds of which it can be established, the arbitration in making decisions related to these requests can be reduced to the minimum. The solutions related to the proceeding of approval of the conditional release must be enlarged through the introduction of the non-public proceeding during the period of solving the request for the conditional release with giving an opportunity to the prisoner of his active participation in it. The hearing of experts making the Report about the prisoner should be introduced at least as a possibility. The state prosecutor should change his role in these proceedings through his active participation in them. The specialization of the court council and its omission from the work and regular competence of the non-debate council will contribute to the work efficiency in these cases. Revocation of conditional release should be done in the same way as the proceeding of approval of conditional release. The conditional release as a correction to the legally binding judgment demands to be under the supervision of professional organs and jurisdiction of the court. This should be done regardless the fact whether the imprisonment is suspended through the conditional release and the prisoner is obliged to fulfill the obligations regulated by the criminal law regulations.