repercussions of modified procedural roles on determining the facts in criminal proceedings

The main characteristic of the new Code of Criminal Procedure, 2011, which is based on adversial principle, is changed position of the main subjects. The public prosecutor gets more active role. It is head of the pre-investigative procedure and the investigation. At trial, the role of the parties emphasized, while the role of the court passivated. The Court adjudicate and manage the process, while in the presentation of evidence, for the proper and complete determination of the facts, his role significantly diminished. The court is not obliged ex officio to determine the truth, and the principle of truth is omitted from the basic principles of criminal procedure. Evidentiary initiative is, largely, up to the parties, while the court granted subsidiary role. Basis of the work is the thesis that the Code of Criminal Procedure from 2011, based on the truth principle, which is also the goal of the procedure. In fact, while working on the development of the legal text, and after of the adoption, to the beginning of its application in full range, in professional community there were lots of papers, which cast doubt on the principle of truth existence, in the currently valid procedural law of Serbia. Although this principle is not actually explicitly stipulated in the text of the new CPC, the author proves his existence by analyzing of certain provisions of the law, which has significantly altered the position of the main criminal procedural subjects, in terms establishing the facts in criminal proceedings. The author argues that the truth about a criminal matter remains the highest goal of the procedure, despite the fact that the concept of criminal proceedings is set on the adversial model od criminal proceedings.