Alternative resolutions of criminal proceedings are construed as special types of criminal proceedings, alternative to standard hearing of a case in main trial, within which the criminal case may be settled, in the procedural-law point of view, in the same adequate way as in standard criminal proceedings. The stage of judicial hearing of the case will generally not take place

After year 1989, new ways of decision-making in criminal proceedings began to appear, in particular as a result of foreign inspiration, that presented an alternative to issuing a condemning judgment and that were bound to specific conditions, such as seriousness of the criminal offense, confession of the perpetrator etc.

These alterantive resolutions include:

• conditional suspension of criminal prosecution,
• settlement,
• criminal order,
• conditional suspension of filing a motion for punishment,
• in proceedings conducted against juveniles also the waiver of criminal prosecution.

First of all it is necessary to point out that all types of proceedings provided for in the Code of Criminal Procedure are equal in principle, within the sense of procedural execution of the case. However, the accused person is entitled only to hearing his case in standard main trial, other courses of proceedings are designed as a facultative alternative thereto. Selection of the specific course of proceeding is not entirely in the free discretion of the court. The law expressly stipulates the conditions for application of each individual type of proceeding. The court also has to follow the applicable basic principles in the course of its deliberation (to name a few in particular, the principle of equality of parties to proceedings, presumption of innocence, and speed and efficiency of proceedings).

At the same time, the interest of the aggrieved party should play a crucial role in deliberation of the court..

The role of an intermediary in settling the conflict of the accused person and the aggrieved person may be entrusted to the probation officer, which may operate as a mediator in the course of drafting the agreement on the manner of compensation of the damage caused and dealing with the consequences of the criminal offense, to prepare other necessary documents for conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution or settlement and then verify the fulfillment thereof.

Conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution may be characterized as a temporary decision associated with setting a probation period, subject to fulfilment of certain conditions and obligations imposed to the accused person. In view of criminal substantive law, criminal liability of the perpetrator continues to exist and in view of criminal procedural law the case continues to be handled by authorities involved in criminal proceedings. The accused person still has the option to insist on regular hearing of the case by the competent court.

This institution may be utilized in cases where given the circumstances of the case and personality of the accused person it is apparent that in the event of a condemning judgment a suspended sentence of imprisonment would be imposed and the accused person would most likely approve himself in the course of the probation period. Therefore to a large extent it is unnecessary to conduct the entire criminal proceeding, when its purpose can be achieved in a substantially simpler manner.

The decision on conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution may be issued under the following conditions:

• he proceeding in question deals with a misdemeanor (i.e. all negligent criminal offences and those intentional criminal offences, the upper limit of which does not exceed five years),
• sconsent of the accused person and his confession to the act,
• compensation of damage by the accused, if it was caused by the act, or entering into an agreement on the compensation of damage with the aggrieved person, or taking other necessary steps towards its compensation,
• surrendering any unjust enrichment gained by the act, and
• given the personality of the accused person and his previous life and circumstances of the case such decision may be deemed as sufficient.

There is a new possibility, if it is justified by the nature and seriousness of the committed crime, circumstances of its commission or relations of the accused person, to require the accused person, in addition to fulfillment of the conditions above, also to undertake that he will refrain from a certain activity in the course of the probation period, in connection to which he has committed the crime, or to deposit a financial sum to the account of the court and in pre-trial proceedings to the account of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, for assistance to the victims of crime. In such case the probation period may last as long as 5 five years.

The above-stated procedural institution may be used, after the statutory conditions are fulfilled and with a previous consent of the accused person, by the court and in pre-trial proceedings by the public prosecutor.

The decision in conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution must state the time, for which the prosecution is conditional discontinued. This probation period lasts for six months to two, or as the case may be, five years and will start on the day the decision on conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution becomes final and effective.

The accused person and the aggrieved person may file a complaint against the decision on conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution, which has a dilatory effect. If the decision on conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution was made by court, this right pertains also to the public prosecutor.

If the accused person led an upright life in the course of probation period, fulfilled the imposed obligations, compensated the damage caused and complied also with any additional restrictions imposed, then the authority that conditionally discontinued the criminal prosecution in the first instance will decide that the accused person has approved himself. However, if the accused person fails to comply with the imposed conditions, his criminal prosecution will continue, or in exceptional cases the probation period may be extended by an additional year.

Application practice does allow conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution also in case no damage was caused by the criminal offense.  However, in such cases the court (or public prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings) must thoroughly consider, whether with regard to the personality of the perpetrator and circumstances of the case the conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution may be considered a sufficient manner of execution of the case.

Settlement represents a type of divergence in criminal proceedings that is designed to facilitate settlement of the conflict between the perpetrator and aggrieved person in social relationships.

The purpose of settlement is primarily that the accused person thoroughly remedied all harmful effects incurred to the aggrieved person by the criminal offense, and this interest is being prioritized over the interest on punishing the perpetrator. A certain aspect of criminal repression is contained in the fact that the accused person may be imposed an obligation to additional monetary performance exceeding the framework of the damage caused, which serves for publically beneficial purposes.

Decision on settlement may be issued under the following conditions:

• the proceeding in question deals with a misdemeanor (i.e. all negligent criminal offences and those intentional criminal offences, the upper limit of which does not exceed five years),
• consent of both the accused and aggrieved person,
• statement of the accused person that he has committed the act, for which he is being prosecuted, and there are no reasonable doubts that his declaration was made freely, solemnly and specifically,
• ompensation of damage caused by the criminal offense to the aggrieved person or necessary steps of the accused person towards its compensation, eventually another way of rectification of the harm incurred by the offense,
• vysurrender of unjust enrichment gained by the act, or taking other appropriate staps towards its surrendering,
• the accused person will deposit a financial sum to the account of the court or in pre-trial proceedings the Public Prosecutor’s Office designated for assistance to the victims of crime, and such performance is not clearly disproportionate to the seriousness of the misdemeanor, and
• given the nature and seriousness of the committed crime, the extent in which public interest was affected by the act and the personality of the accused person and his personal and property relations such manner of execution of the case may be deemed as sufficient.

The Code of Criminal procedure allows that the decision on approving settlement in pre-trial proceedings is made by the public prosecutor. The accused and the aggrieved person may file a complaint against his decision.

In case the decision on settlement is made by court, the complaint against the decision on approving the settlement may also be filed by the public prosecutor. The complaint has a dilatory effect.

Issuing a criminal order represents shortened pre-trial proceedings, without evidence proceedings and cooperation of the parties. Criminal order is issued in proceedings before a sole judge. It may be characterized as a tool for simplification and speeding-up of criminal proceedings in less complicated matters (both factually and legally), where the purpose of criminal proceedings may be achieved even without conducting formal main trial. The Code of Criminal Procedure accords this form of decision the character of condemning judgement. Effects associated with declaration of judgement arise at the moment of service of the criminal order to the accused person.

The basic condition for issuing a criminal order is the fact that the factual state is securely proven by the ascertained evidence. In case a protest is filed within eight days following the service of the criminal order, the criminal order is repealed and a main trial is ordered.

Conditional suspension of filing a motion for punishment represents a form of a warning the suspect receives before his case is handed over to court for criminal prosecution if he does not learn his lesson, does not comply with the imposed conditions or commits unlawful conduct.

This is a resolution of the public prosecutor in shortened pre-trial proceedings issued under similar conditions as in the case of conditional discontinuation of criminal prosecution.

In the decision on conditional suspension of submission of a motion for punishment a probation period will be set for six months to two years, or as the case may be, up to five years. Consent of the aggrieved party is not required for this decision. However, the right to file a complaint against this decision is maintained for the suspect and the aggrieved person, the complaint has a dilatory effect.

In case the suspect has led an upright life in the course of the probation period and complied with other imposed restrictions, the public prosecutor who conditionally suspended the submission of a motion for punishment will decide that the suspect has approved himself. Otherwise the police authority that has so far conducted the pre-trial proceedings will be ordered, also in the course of the probation period, to initiate criminal prosecution and proceed with it further.

This is another option of the public prosecutor, to whom was delivered a motion of the Police authority after the conclusion of shortened pre-trial proceedings to decide on approving a settlement, if the conditions stipulated for settlement are met, and at the same time decide to adjourn the case. The reason behind this legal regulation is to speed up criminal proceedings in the event the case can be dealt with prior to initiating criminal prosecution, and also faster satisfaction of the claim of the aggrieved person and thus overall increase in the economy of proceedings.

The Juvenile Justice Act has supplemented the existing divergences in juvenile matters by a new institution of waiver of criminal prosecution of a juvenile. This type of divergence consists in the possibility of the public prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings and the juvenile court in trial proceedings to waive criminal prosecution and at the same time discontinue criminal prosecution on the grounds of absence of public interest in further prosecution of the juvenile, of course if all statutory conditions are met.

The decision to waive criminal prosecution may be issued if the following conditions are met:

• the proceeding in question deals with a juvenile offense, the upper limit of imprisonment of which does not exceed three years,
• there is no public interest on further prosecution of the juvenile,
• criminal prosecution would not be purposeful, and
• punishment is not necessary to turn the juvenile away from committing other offenses.

Criminal prosecution may be waived especially in case the juvenile has already undertaken a suitable probation program, has fully or in part compensated the damage caused by the juvenile offense and the aggrieved person agrees with such compensation, or if the juvenile was reprehended with a warning and such solution may be considered sufficient in view of the purpose of the proceedings.

A complaint is admissible against the resolution on waiver of criminal prosecution of a juvenile, which has a dilatory effect. The aggrieved person will be notified of the waiver of criminal prosecution. The aggrieved person thus does not have the right to file a complaint against this resolution. The only option of the aggrieved person to influence the decision on waiver of criminal prosecution of the juvenile is his consent with the extent and manner of compensation, which he is entitled to grant before the decision is made. Consequently, in case damage was caused by the offence of the juvenile, he must compensate it at least in part, whereas the aggrieved person must agree with such compensation.

Agreement on the guilt and punishment is an agreement between the public prosecutor and the accused person in pre-trial proceedings (or alternatively during trial proceedings) which can be made only in relation to criminal offences that are no especially serious offenses – i.e. misdemeanors and felonies, the upper limit of imprisonment of which does not reach 10 years. The agreement cannot be concluded in case of proceedings conducted against a fugitive and in case of a juvenile under 18 years of age. The basic condition of initiation of negotiations on the agreement on the guilt and punishment is the fact that the outcome of investigation proves the conclusion that the deed in question is a criminal offense and that it was committed by the accused person. If this basic condition is fulfilled, the public prosecutor may initiate – upon a motion of the accused person or even without it – negotiation with the accused person on the contents of this agreement. In order to conclude the agreement, two more conditions must be fulfilled. One is an express declaration of the accused person that he has committed the act he is prosecuted for and the other is absence of any reasonable doubts regarding the truthfulness of this declaration. In case the agreement is not concluded or approved, such declaration of the accused person may not be considered as confession to the criminal offense and it may not be used as evidence in subsequent proceedings.

Within the framework of protection of the rights of the aggrieved person the public prosecutor must heed his rights. The aggrieved person is entitled to be present to the negotiation of the public prosecutor with the accused person on the agreement, if he has not expressly declared that he waives his procedural rights. The aggrieved person is entitled to assert his claim for monetary compensation of damage or non-material harm caused to him by the criminal act or for the surrender of unjust enrichment no later than at the first hearing on the agreement on the guilt and punishment.

If the agreement on the guilt and punishment is concluded, the public prosecutor will deliver its copy to the accused person, his defense counsel and the aggrieved person, who has duly and timely asserted his claims. Subsequently the public prosecutor will submit the draft agreement on the guilt and punishment to the competent court, whereas if the agreement on compensation of the claims of the aggrieved person has not been reached, he will caution the court thereof. The court will assess whether the agreement on the guilt and punishment was concluded in compliance with the law, therein it must not interfere with its contents. The court may refuse the draft for serious procedural flaws, then the matter is remitted to the pre-trial stage of proceedings. If the court reaches the conclusion that the concluded agreement on the guilt and punishment is correct and appropriate in view of compliance with the ascertained facts of the case and with regard to the extent of the proposed sentence or protective measure, as well as correct in view of the extent and manner of compensation of damage, and if it does not find any serious infringement of rights of the accused person in relation to entering the agreement, then it will approve the agreement by a judgment, in which it will state the ruling on guilt and punishment or protective measure and on the compensation of damage.