scholarly journals The German “Verständigung” and Consensual Elements in German Criminal Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 1134-1148
Author(s):  
Matthias Jahn ◽  
Charlotte Schmitt-Leonardy
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
German Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Negotiated Agreements ◽  
Traditional Sense ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Individual

AbstractNegotiated agreements in criminal proceedings have often been regarded as the embodiment of a negative wider trend towards the informalization of the criminal procedure, and have—especially in Germany—long been the subject of vivid controversies. A criminal proceeding in the traditional sense aims to establish the truth ex officio, which is achieved by means of a comprehensive inquiry into the facts conducted by the court during the trial, followed by a sentence that appropriately reflects the individual guilt of the defendant, which can then, in turn, achieve the procedural objective of “justice.” A streamlining of the extensive inquiry into the facts that the court would normally have to conduct via the consensual process of negotiation does not, a priori, fit the mold of a criminal procedure in the aforementioned sense. At the same time, the consensual termination of criminal proceedings—which also includes other forms of termination of the proceeding besides the concept of Verständigung, which occur by means of a preferment of public charges—is, in fact, more prevalent in practice these days than judgments rendered in adversarial trials are. Our Article focuses on the reasons why this stark contrast between legal doctrine and reality came to pass and which aspects of the implementation of the concept of consensus into the German law of criminal procedure still seem problematic.

CONCEPT AND CONTENT OF A RECONCILIATION AGREEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariia Sirotkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Main Attention ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

The article is turned out to a scientific search for the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or accused" through the study of the essence of reconciliation and role in criminal proceedings thereof. The author notes that criminal procedural law (until 2012) had been proclaimed another approach to reconciliation between victim and suspect, not involved a dispute procedure as a conflict, the result of which can be reached by compromise and understanding through reconciliation. It is stated that one of the ways to resolve the legal conflict in committing a criminal offense was the opportunity to reach a compromise between the victim and the suspect (the accused) by concluding a reconciliation agreement between them, provided by the Code of Сriminal Procedure of Ukraine (2012). The main attention is placed on the shortcoming of the domestic criminal procedure law which is the lack of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or the accused", which can be eliminated only through examining the essence or legal nature of reconciliation in criminal proceedings. Taking into consideration the current legislation and modern views on the institution of reconciliation in criminal proceedings, the author's definition of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement" is proposed. Thus, “The conciliation agreement is an agreement in criminal proceedings concluded between the victim and the suspect or the accused person on their own initiative in relation to crimes of minor or medium gravity and in criminal proceedings in the form of private prosecution, the subject of which is the compensation of harm caused by wrongdoing or committing other actions not related to compensation for the damage that the suspect or the accused is obliged to commit in favor of the victim, in exchange for an agreed punishment and sentencing thereof or sentencing thereof and relief from serving a sentence with probation, as well as the statutory consequences of conclusion and approval of the agreement".

PROBLEM ASPECTS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL NORMS OF PROTECTION OF THE VICTIMS FROM CRIME

2020 ◽  
pp. 72-76
Author(s):  
Яна Валерьевна Самиулина
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Effective Mechanism ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Selection Of

В настоящей статье предпринята попытка исследовать отдельные проблемные аспекты института потерпевшего в российском уголовном процессе. В этих целях подвергнуты анализу правовые нормы, регламентирующие его процессуальный статус. Раскрываются отдельные пробелы уголовно-процессуального законодательства в сфере защиты законных прав и интересов потерпевшего. Автор акцентирует внимание на том, что совершенствование уголовно-процессуального законодательства в части расширения правомочий потерпевшего по отстаиванию своих нарушенных преступлением прав следует продолжить. На основании проведенного исследования действующего законодательства в части регламентации прав потерпевшего от преступления предлагается расширить перечень получаемых им копий постановлений, указанных в п. 13 ч. 2 ст. 42 УПК РФ. Автор предлагает включить в перечень указанной законодательной нормы право получения потерпевшим копии постановления об избрании конкретного вида меры пресечения, избранного в отношении подозреваемого (обвиняемого). Для создания действенного механизма защиты интересов потерпевших от преступления юридических лиц предлагаем ч. 9 ст. 42 УПК РФ изложить в следующей редакции: «в случае признания потерпевшим юридического лица его процессуальное право в уголовном процессе осуществляет представляющий его профессиональный адвокат». This article attempts to investigate certain problematic aspects of the institution of the victim in the Russian criminal process. For this purpose, analyzed the individual norms governing his procedural status. Separate gaps of the criminal procedure legislation in the sphere of protection of the legal rights and interests of the victim are disclosed. The author emphasizes that the improvement of the criminal procedure legislation in terms of the extension of the victim’s authority to defend his rights violated by the crime should be continued. On the basis of the study of the current legislation regarding the regulation of the rights of the victim of a crime, it is proposed to expand the list of decisions received by him, referred to in paragraph 13, part 2 of article 42 Code of Criminal Procedure. The author proposes to include in the list of the indicated legislative norm the right to receive the victim a copy of the decision on the selection of a specific type of preventive measure, selected in relation to the suspect (accused). To create an effective mechanism for protecting the interests of legal entities victims of a crime, we offer part 9 of art. 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation shall be reworded as follows: «if a legal entity is recognized as a victim, his procedural right in criminal proceedings is exercised by the professional lawyer representing him».

DEFINITIONS OF CATEGORIES PURPOSE AND TASKS OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE MODERN CRIMINAL PROCESS

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Svitlana Patiuк ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Modern Theory ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
State Changes ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Goals And Objectives ◽  
Functional Purpose

"Definitions of categories, the goal and objectives of criminal proceedings in modern criminal proceedings" analysed the legal norms and provisions of doctrinal concepts to determine the goals and objectives of criminal proceedings. The author formulated conclusions and generalizations that since criminal proceedings are a sphere of state activity, it depends on the direction of the political course of the state, changes in state policy, which always leads to a change in the ideology of the criminal process as a whole, including the transformation of goals and objectives criminal proceedings. The purpose and objectives of criminal proceedings depend on the historical form of the criminal process, a common feature of which is the ratio of freedom (interests) of the individual and the state, expressed in the procedural position of the main participants in the process. Criminal procedure legislation and doctrine define the resolution of a dispute (conflict) between the state and the accused arising as a result of the commission of a crime as the goal of the criminal process in most countries in which the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings prevails. As the goal of criminal proceedings in the modern theory of criminal procedure, it is proposed to consider the protection of the individual, society and the state from criminal offences in the settlement of criminal-legal conflicts arising as a result of these offences. The goal in the criminal process determines the setting of tasks and represents the ultimate conclusion from the sum of all the tasks being implemented. The task of criminal proceedings should be determined taking into account the functional purpose of the subjects of criminal proceedings, and therefore the task is the fulfilment of his duty by a participant in criminal proceedings, which is determined by his functional purpose, based on the principle of competition of the parties.

scholarly journals Prohibition of interrogation of notaries as witnesses in criminal proceedings

1970 ◽  
pp. 345-349
Author(s):  
Ulyana Polyak
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Notary Public ◽  
Made In

The current criminal procedure law of Ukraine stipulates that a witness is obliged to give a true testimony during pre-trial investigation and trial, however, the legislator made an exception for this by specifying the categories of persons who have been granted immunity from immunity, ie they are released by law. testify. The article deals with the problems of law and practice regarding the prohibition of the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings and the release of him from the obligation to keep the notarial secret by the person who entrusted him with the information which is the subject of this secret. The notion of notarial secrecy is proposed to be changed, since the subject of this secrecy is not only information that became known to the notary public from the interested person, but also those information that the notary received from other sources in the performance of their professional duties, as well as the procedural activity of the notary himself, is aimed at achieving a certain legal result. The proposal made in the legal literature to supplement the CPC of Ukraine with the provisions that a notary is subject to interrogation as a witness on information that constitutes a notarial secret, if the notarial acts were declared illegal in accordance with the procedure established by law The proposal to increase the list of persons who are not subject to interrogation as witnesses about the information constituting a notarial secret is substantiated, this clause is proposed to be supplemented by provisions that, apart from the notary, are not notarized, other notarials, notaries as well as the persons mentioned in Part 3 of Art. 8 of the Law of Ukraine "On Notary". Amendments to the current CPC of Ukraine by the amendments proposed in this publication will significantly improve the law prohibiting the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings, as well as improve certain theoretical provisions of the institute of witness immunity in criminal proceedings.

POWERS OF THE PRESIDING JUDGE IN A JURY TRIAL IN THE CONTEXT OF ADVERSARIAL PRINCIPLES OF RUSSIAN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

2021 ◽  
pp. 64-76
Author(s):  
Tatyana K. Ryabinina ◽  
◽  
Daria O. Chistilina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
Jury Trials ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Individual

The main objective is to examine the powers of the presiding judge in jury trials in the context of adversarial principles of criminal proceedings. Particular attention will be paid by the authors to different approaches to the notion of adversariality and the definition of the role of a professional judge in such courts, as well as the degree of his activity during the judicial investigation. The main methods used by the authors were dialectical and systematic method, analysis, synthesis, as well as special legal methods of knowledge. The outcome of the research will be a definition of the role of the presiding judge in a jury trial. Forms of criminal procedure that allow the individual to directly participate in the deci-sion-making process of the judiciary are responsible for ensuring citizen participation in the administration of justice in the state. Two such forms have been developed in the world practice so far: the classical jury trial model and the Scheffen model. Each of them provides certain (broad or narrow) powers of a professional judge, the scope of which determines the degree of independence of citizens and the ultimate prospects for the development of a system of popular democratic justice in an adversarial system of criminal proceedings. In today's Russia, the classical jury trial model, modeled after the English jury trial, does not provide for broad powers of the court. In addition, there is the adversarial principle in Russia, which is fostered by the existence of jury trials. However, strict adherence to its provisions may lead to a misunderstanding of the role of the presiding judge in such a court. The activity of a professional judge should be balanced in accordance with the needs of the criminal case under consideration. Thus, requesting additional evidence in the course of the trial in order to verify existing evidence should not be considered a violation of the adversarial principle. Thus, the development of the optimal model for jury trial functioning as well as the determination of the presiding judge's role in the context of adversarial principles of criminal proceedings is a socially-systemic task. It requires a comprehensive dogmatic, comparative-legal and political-legal approach in order to develop the jury trial model which is more con-sistent with the legal system of the state.

Termination of Criminal Proceedings in Public Criminal Cases by Courts of First Instance Under Art. 24, Para. 1, Item 5 of the Bulgarian Code of Criminal Procedure and Its Compliance with European Union Law

De Jure ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Debora Valkova-Terzieva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Subject

The subject of this research is a specific prerequisite for the termination of criminal proceedings in public criminal cases, regulated in Article 24, Paragraph 1, Item 5 of the Bulgarian Code of Criminal Procedure. This analysis was necessitated by the fact that the European Union had introduced certain obligations for the Member States.

Limits of proof in criminal proceedings

2020 ◽  
pp. 82-86
Author(s):  
Aleksei Marochkin ◽  
Viktoriya Slyvnaya
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Reasonable Doubt ◽  
Main Body ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Research Activity ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Evidence Collection ◽  
The Subject ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Moment

Problem setting. Proving in criminal proceedings is evidence collection and research activity of special subjects of criminal proceedings. The specific purpose of prooving is to obtain knowledge that is close to reality. To achieve this purpose, the theory of criminal procedure operates with the concept of “limits of proof”. In view of the above, it is important to study this phenomenon, because, firstly, there is no legislative regulation, and secondly, there is no unity in the theory of criminal procedure on this issue. Target research. The aim of the work is to define the concept of the limits of proof; to find out the moment of reaching the limits of proof and cases of narrowing and expanding the limits of proof; to analyze case law on this issue. Analysis of recent research and publication. The question of determining the limits of proof, their relationship with the subject of prooving has been the subject of scientific research. In particular, the works of such researchers in the field of criminal procedure as A.R. Belkin, V.V. Vapnarchuk, G.F. Gorsky, Yu.M. Groshev, V.S. Zelenetsky, E.G. Kovalenko, L.D. Kokorev, R.V. Kostenko, R.D. Rakhunov, В.В. Rozhnov, V.G. Tanasovich, F.N. Fatkullin, A.A. Khmirov deserve attention. Article’s main body. The article discusses the concept and significance of the limits of proof in criminal proceedings, analyzes the differences between them and other procedural categories, and analyzes doctrinal developments regarding the criteria for reaching boundaries and judicial practice in cases of expanding or narrowing the limits of proof. Conclusions and prospect of development. Thus, the study allows us to state that the concept of the limits of proof in criminal proceedings is multifaceted and important because it aims to achieve fair trial. The limits of proof are individual for each specific criminal proceeding, and an important criterion for determining it is the standard of proof of guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt”. That is why the future study of this phenomenon in criminal proceedings becomes relevant due to the need to bring national criminal proceedings closer to European standards of justice.

scholarly journals Medical and Chemical Expertise in English Trials for Criminal Poisoning, 1750–1914

2006 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine D Watson
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Late Nineteenth Century ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Medical Expertise ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Eighteenth And Nineteenth Centuries

This article contributes to the literature on the history of medico-legal practice by using a survey of 535 poisoning cases to examine the emergence of forensic toxicological expertise in nineteenth-century English criminal trials. In emphasizing chemical expertise, it seeks both to expand upon a limited literature on the history of the subject, and to offer a contrast to studies of criminal poisoning that have tended to focus primarily on medical expertise. Poisoning itself is a topic of abiding interest to historians of forensic medicine and science because (together with insanity) it long tended to attract the greatest attention (and often confrontation) in criminal proceedings. In looking at a wide number of cases, however, it becomes apparent that few aroused true medico-legal controversy. Rather, the evidence from several hundred cases tried as felonies during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries indicates that prior to the 1830s few presented any opportunity for “a battle of experts”. While Ian Burney and Tal Golan have shown that this was certainly not the case during the mid and late nineteenth century, this paper goes further by dividing the period under study into three distinct phases in order to show how expert testimony (and experts themselves) changed during the course of the century, and why this process opened a door to the potential for formalized controversy.

PARTIAL WITHDRAWAL OF THE PRINCIPAL ACTION BY THE PROCESUTOR IN THE POLISH CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (XIX) ◽  
pp. 173-183
Author(s):  
Jan Kil
Keyword(s):  
Current Model ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Subject

The subject of the article is the analysis of the admissibility of a partial withdrawal of a principalaction by the prosecutor in the current model of Polish criminal proceedings. The study defines the main procedural rules regarding the issue in question, namely the principle of accusatorial procedure and adversary trial system. In the study, the disposition of Article 14 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is being interpreted with the use of linguistic, teleological and functional directives of interpretation. The study also presents the arguments justifying the acceptance of the view of the admissibility of partial withdrawal of the complaint by the public prosecutor. The study presents the procedural implications of the aforementioned standpoint. In the study the possibility of partial withdrawal of the principal action on the basis of pending supplementary or private prosecution proceedings was also analyzed.

scholarly journals ДЕЯКІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТИМЧАСОВОГО ВИЛУЧЕННЯ ТА АРЕШТУ МАЙНА ЯК ЗАХОДІВ ЗАБЕЗПЕЧЕННЯ КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ПРОВАДЖЕННЯ

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 520-528
Author(s):  
І. В. Гловюк
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

Стаття присвячена дослідженню проблемних питань застосування тимчасового вилу­чення майна та арешту майна як заходів забезпечення кримінального провадження із урахуванням наявної судової практики. Указано та обґрунтовано некоректність норма­тивного визначення тимчасового вилучення майна. Відмічено прогальність нормативного визначення арешту майна в аспекті об'єктів, на які може бути накладено арешт. Сфор­мульовано пропозиції щодо внесення змін та доповнень до ч. 1 ст. 167 КПК щодо ви­значення поняття «тимчасове вилучення майна» та ч. 1 ст. 170 КПК щодо осіб, на майно яких може бути накладено арешт.   The article is dedicated to the research of problematic issues of exercise of temporary seizure of property and arrest of property as means for ensuring criminal proceedings considering relevant judicial practices. Author mentioned and justified his point of view regarding incorrectness of the normative definition of seizure. Author also indicated whitespaces of the regulatory definition of arrest of property in the aspect of objects that may be the subject for the arrest. Proposals for amendments and additions to the part 1 of the Art. 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the definition of «temporary seizure of property» and part 1 of the Art. 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the scope of persons whose property may be arrested have been made.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document