- citati u SCIndeksu: [2]
- citati u CrossRef-u:0
- citati u Google Scholaru:[
 ]
- posete u poslednjih 30 dana:10
- preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:7
|
|
|
2015, vol. 49, br. 1, str. 215-238
|
|
Pretresanje računara radi pronalaska elektronskih dokaza
Search of computers for discovery of electronic evidence
Projekat: Projekat Pravnog fakulteta Univerziteta u Novom Sadu: Teorijski i praktični problemi stvaranja i primene prava (EU i Srbija)
Sažetak
Da bi se odgovorilo na specifičnu prirodu kriminalnih aktivnosti učinjenih korišćenjem računarskih mreža i sistema, razumljivo je nastojanje država da prilagode, odnosno upotpune postojeće krivično zakonodavstvo svrsishodnim odredbama. Za stvaranje odgovarajućeg pravnog okvira za suprotstavljanje visokotehnološkom kriminalu, osim što se u propisima krivičnog materijalnog prava određena ponašanja predviđaju kao krivična dela protiv poverljivosti, celovitosti i dostupnosti računarskih podataka, računarskih sistema i mreža, neophodno je da propisi krivičnog procesnog prava sadrže ovlašćenja nadležnih organa adekvatna za otkrivanje izvora nedozvoljene radnje, odnosno prikupljanje podataka o učinjenom krivičnom delu i učiniocu, koji mogu biti iskorišćeni kao dokaz u krivičnom postupku, a vodeći računa o specifičnostima visokotehnološkog kriminala i okruženja u okviru kog se nedozvoljene aktivnosti preduzimaju. Shodno tome, odredbama krivičnog procesnog prava bi trebalo omogućiti da se prevaziđu određeni izazovi u otkrivanju i dokazivanju dela visokotehnološkog kriminala, a naročit značaj imaju odredbe kojima se uređuje pretresanje računara radi pronalaska elektronskih dokaza.
Abstract
In order to address the specific nature of criminal activities committed using computer networks and systems, the efforts of states to adapt or complement the existing criminal law with purposeful provisions is understandable. To create an appropriate legal framework for supressing cybercrime, except the rules of substantive criminal law predict certain behavior as criminal offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data, computer systems and networks, it is essential that the provisions of the criminal procedure law contain adequate powers of competent authorities for detecting sources of illegal activities, or the collection of data on the committed criminal offense and offender, which can be used as evidence in criminal proceedings, taking into account the specificities of cyber crime and the environment within which the illegal activity is undertaken. Accordingly, the provisions of the criminal procedural law should be designed to be able to overcome certain challenges in discovering and proving high technology crime, and the provisions governing search of computer for discovery of electronic evidence is of special importance.
|
|
|
|
Reference
|
|
|
*** (2009) Zakon o potvrđivanju Konvencije o visokotehnološkom kriminalu. Sl. glasnik RS, br. 19
|
|
|
*** (2011-2014) Zakonik o krivičnom postupku. Službeni glasnik RS, br. 72/2011, 101/2011, 121/2012, 32/2013, 45/2013 i 55/2014
|
|
|
*** (1988) Codice di Procedura Penale. Testo coordinato ed aggiornato del D. P. R. 22 September 1988, n. 447, http://www.altalex.com/index.php?idnot=36800
|
|
|
*** Federal rules of criminal procedure. http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp
|
|
  
|
Adler, M. (1996) Cyberspace, General Searches, and Digital Contraband: The Fourth Amendment and the Net-Wide Search. Yale Law Journal, 105(4): 1093
|
|
|
Chang, R. (2007) Why the plain view doctrine should not apply to digital evidence. Suffolk journal of trial and appellate advocacy, 1, 43
|
|
|
Dodovich, M. (2011) The plain view doctrine strikes out in digital file searches. A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 6, 659-691
|
|
|
Kerr, O. (2010) Ex ante regulation of computer search and seizure. Virginia Law Review, 6, 1241-1293
|
|
|
Kerr, O. (2005) Searches and seizures in digital world. Harvard Law Review, 2, 531-585
|
|
5 
|
Lukić, T. (2012) Digitalni dokazi. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad, vol. 46, br. 2, str. 177-192
|
|
1
|
Maier, B. (2010) How Has the Law Attempted to Tackle the Borderless Nature of the Internet?. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 18(2): 142-175
|
|
|
Moore, R. (2004) To view or not to view: Examining the plain view doctrine and digital evidence. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 29(1): 57-73
|
|
|
Ohm, P. (2011) Massive hard drives, general warrants, and the power of magistrate judges. Virginia Law Review, 1, 97-130
|
|
3
|
Pisarić, M. (2013) Potrebni normativni odgovor na probleme otkrivanja i dokazivanja dela visokotehnološkog kriminala. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad, vol. 47, br. 1, str. 291-307
|
|
|
Saylor, J. (2011) Computers as castles: Preventing the plain view doctrine from becoming a vehicle for overbroad digital searches. Fordham Law Review, 6, 2854-2857
|
|
|
Simpson, B. (2012) 'Preemptive suppression' judges claim the right to find digital evidence inadmissible before it is even discovered. Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 4, 34
|
|
|
Stinsman, J. (2011) Computers and searches, rethinking the applicability of the plain view doctrine. Temple Law Review, 4, 1097-1120
|
|
|
Weir, B. (2010) It's (not so) plain to see: The circuit split on The plain view doctrine in digital searches. Civil Rights Law Journal, 1, 83-121
|
|
|
Wolfson, A. (2005) Electronic fingerprints: Doing away with conception of computer-generated records as hearsay. Michigan Law review, 1, 156
|
|
|
|
|