Obrisani Korisnik — Fri, 22 May 2026 16:13:18 GMT

Mirjan Damaška: “Zločin uvrede

veličanstva u ogledalu zrinsko-

frankopanske urote"

Zločin uvrede veličanstva u ogledalu zrinsko-frankopanske urote

Dr. sc. Mirjan Damaška, Sterling Professor Emeritus of Law (Yale Law School); počasni doktor Sveučilišta u Zagrebu; dopisni član Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti; mirjan.damaska@yale.edu; ORCID ID: orcid.org/0009-0009-0598-089X

Sažetak
U prvome dijelu rada autor analizira propise koji su se u njemačkim političkim zajednicama 17. stoljeća odnosili na kazneno djelo uvrede veličanstva. Ti su propisi bili mješavina rimskog prava, kaznenog zakonodavstva njemačkih zemalja 16. i 17. stoljeća, kao i mišljenja učenih pravnika. U drugome dijelu rada autor razmatra pitanje je li to pravo bilo ispravno primijenjeno u kaznenim postupcima protiv Petra Zrinskog i Frana Krste Frankopana. Njegov je zaključak da su po tom pravu hrvatski velikaši doista bili krivi za uvredu veličanstva ili veleizdaju. Dokaze za to pružili su i vlastitim iskazima. Nesumnjivo je, međutim, da je nadležnost suda bila stečena prijevarnim načinom, i to lažnim sugestijama da će biti pomilovani ako dođu u Beč i pokore se caru. Osim toga sud je po onodobnim propisima bio neispravno sastavljen. Najutjecajniji članovi sudskog vijeća imali su izvan suda stečena saznanja o djelovanju Zrinskog i Frankopana i izrazili su uvjerenje u njihovu krivnju još prije pokretanja formalnog sudskog postupka protiv hrvatskih velikaša. Osobito je dvojbena bila sudska odluka o smrtnim kaznama. Iako je sudsko vijeće bilo sastavljeno isključivo od njemačkih sudaca, a tuženo ponašanje okrivljenih imalo izrazit protunjemački karakter, ipak je nekoliko sudaca izrazilo protivljenje smrtnoj kazni. To je mišljenje, međutim, autoritativno zabacio predsjednik vijeća koji je u bečkoj vladi vršio dužnosti koje danas vrši predsjednik vlade. Da je sudsko vijeće bilo ispravno sastavljeno, zaključuje autor, sva je prilika da bi Zrinski i Frankopan izbjegli smrtne kazne.

Ključne riječi: Lex Iulia Maiestatis; perduellio; nota infidelitatis; ius resistendi; sramotne kazne; urota zrinsko-frankopanska

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3935/zpfz.76.1.1

Hrčak ID: 347241

URI: https://hrcak.srce.hr/clanak/501138

Stranice: 5-39

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“The Crime of Lèse-Majesté (crimen laesae maiestatis) in the Mirror of the Zrinski–Frankopan Conspiracy”

Mirjan Damaška, Ph. D., Sterling Professor Emeritus of Law at Yale Law School; mirjan.damaska@yale.edu; ORCID ID: orcid.org/0009-0009-0598-089X

Summary
In the first part of the article the author considers the law applicable to treason in German political units of the seventeenth century. In the second part he then turns to consider the question whether this law was properly applied in the treason case against Zrinski and Frankopan, two Croatian magnates, descendants of two most illustrious Croatian feudal families. The two were charged with treason against the Austrian Emperor Leopold I, by planning to achieve a sort of not clearly defined Croatian autonomy. The author reaches the conclusion that the two were not wrongly convicted since their behavior fell clearly within the definition of treason as then defined. But clear is also that the court’s jurisdiction over the two magnates was obtained by false promises of Austrian authorities that the Emperor will pardon them if they come to Vienna and apologize to him. Another problem with the rectitude of the case against Zrinski and Frankopan was the improper composition of the court. Especially blatant violation of the then existing law was the fact that two most influential members of the court acquired knowledge of the case extrajudicially, and expressed their belief in the guilt of the accused even before formal proceedings begun. And although all judges were Germans, and the treason possessed a pronounced anti German character, the idea was gaining ground in the court that imposing the death sentence against the defendants was inappropriate. The idea was authoritatively rejected by the presiding judge who was not only member of the court but also Emperor’s prime minster. Had the court been properly set up and sentences properly discussed, concludes the author, the two Croatian noblemen might have escaped execution, and two most illustrious Croatian families might have continued influencing the course of Croatian history.

Keywords: Lex Iulia Maiestatis; perduellio; nota infidelitatis; ius resistendi; shameful punishment; Zrinski-Frankopan conspiracy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3935/zpfz.76.1.1

Hrčak ID: 347241

URI: https://hrcak.srce.hr/clanak/501138

Pages: 5-39

- MIRJAN DAMAŠKA