After examining the general characteristics of Croatia's exclusionary rule and comparing it with exclusionary rules in other countries, this study examined cases from 1998 to mid-2004 (n=416) in which the legality of evidence collected by police was challenged.
Under Croatia's exclusionary rule, confessions obtained from an interrogation cannot be used if they are given under force, threat, or other similar misconduct by interrogators. Police searches are illegal if the police lack a written judicial warrant or if other conditions required for an urgent search without a warrant are not followed. Special investigation measures can be conducted only if ordered by a judicial warrant. These special investigative measures include surveillance and interception of communication, surveillance and recording on premises, covert following and recording of persons and objects, undercover agents and informants, simulated purchase or bribery, and supervised transport or delivery. If the police use any of these measures in violation of the prescribed conditions, all evidence obtained under these conditions will be excluded. Croatia's exclusionary rule is compared with exclusionary rules in Europe in general, Canada, the United States, England, and Germany. In the 416 cases examined for Croatia, evidence collected by police was found to be illegal in approximately 14 percent of the cases. Most of the violations occurred in illegal searches (80.56 percent) and were related to narcotics cases (64 percent). The majority of these violations occurred during home or vehicle searches, followed by property crimes and crimes against life. All of the cases examined involved appeals to Croatia's Supreme Court regarding the legality of evidence collected by the police. 4 tables and 21 references