Disclosure in Scottish Criminal Procedure: Another Step in an Inquisitorial Direction?

2007 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 153-180
Author(s):  
Peter Duff
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Duty

This article describes the recent development of a common law doctrine of disclosure in Scottish criminal procedure when, as little as 10 years ago, the prosecution had no legal duty to disclose any information to the defence prior to trial. Further, it is argued that this transformation has the potential to move the Scottish criminal justice system further from its adversarial base towards a more inquisitorial model.

scholarly journals Giving Victims a Voice: On the Problems of Introducing Victim Impact Statements in German Criminal Procedure

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 1889-1908 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Braun
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Justice Systems ◽  
Victim Impact Statements ◽  
Justice Systems ◽  
Key Participants

Historically, victims of crimes were key participants in the prosecution of crimes around the globe. Over the centuries, however, as public police and prosecution service took over the prosecution of criminal acts, the importance of victims in criminal justice systems decreased in common law and civil law countries alike. The victim was sidelined and the victim's role was reduced to that of a witness for the prosecution. As one of the first scholars to comment on the absence of victims from the criminal justice system, William Frank McDonald referred to the victim as “the forgotten man” in criminal procedure.

Victim Participation in Parole Proceedings in South Africa

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
South African ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Prison Inmate ◽  
Parole Board ◽  
Victims Of Crime ◽  
The Right

South African law provides for circumstances in which victims of crime may participate in the criminal justice system at the investigation, prosecution (trial), sentencing and parole stages. In South Africa, a prison inmate has no right to parole although the courts have held that they have a right to be considered for parole. In some cases, the victims of crime have a right to make submissions to the Parole Board about whether the offender should be released on parole. Section 299A of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 provides for the right of victims of crime to participate in parole proceedings. The purpose of this article is to discuss section 299A and illustrate ways in which victims of crime participate in the parole process. The author also recommends ways in which victims’ rights in section 299A of the Criminal Procedure Act could be strengthened.

scholarly journals Alternative sanctions and measures in the criminal justice system of Slovenia

Temida ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alenka Selih
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Personal Factor ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Alternative Measures ◽  
Alternative Sanctions

The paper presents the ways of introducing both material and procedural alternative measures into the criminal justice system of Slovenia from the beginning of 1990s, particularly into the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1995 (with the further amendments). That relates to both adult and juvenile offenders. Regarding implementation, the author emphasizes characteristics of the implementation of both groups of institutions; pays attention to the fact that procedural institutions are more important for prosecution of minor criminal offences; points out the importance of the personal factor that contributes to the implementation of new provisions; and gives an overview of the first experiment in the Slovenian judiciary related to that. The author gives an analysis of problems dealt with in the Slovenian doctrine and judicial practice in connection with alternative ways of proceeding; she points out, in particular, the imperfections of legal solutions; the unclear competences in implementation of alternative sanctions and problems resulting from such a situation.

“Visible” and “Invisible” Victims in the Criminal Justice System

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Armando Saponaro
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Law System ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Victim Impact Statement

This chapter outlines the “conflict” and “peace-keeping” victim-oriented justice paradigms. The latter empowers the victims of crime, putting them at the center of an encounter and using interindividual mediation or collective circles to address conflict resolution. Two models are critically discussed in the conflict victim-oriented justice paradigm. The European continental “visible victim” model structures the role of the victim as a full-fledged processual party together with the public prosecutor and offender. In this model, the victim has the same rights and powers of the defendant. The “invisible victim” common law model views the victim as a trial witness, participating, for example, through a victim impact statement (in the United States) or victim personal statement (in the United Kingdom) at the sentencing stage. The visible victim conflict paradigm model enhances a victim's role and involvement in the criminal justice system, offering a solution to existing controversial and critical common law system issues.

1. Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Hannibal ◽  
Lisa Mountford
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Professional Conduct ◽  
Criminal Courts

This introductory chapter briefly sets out the volume’s purpose, which is to explain the legal, procedural and evidential rules governing how cases are dealt with by the criminal justice system. It then explains the philosophy of the text and its unique features; introduces the key personnel and organisations within the criminal justice system; introduces the Criminal Procedure Rules; explains the classification of offences according to their trial venue; summarizes the jurisdiction of the criminal courts; stresses the importance of the pervasive issue of human rights; and highlights professional conduct considerations in the context of criminal litigation.

scholarly journals Eavesdropping in the Iranian Criminal Justice System

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 60
Author(s):  
Mansour Rahmdel
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Exact Nature ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Full Protection

That the individual shall have full protection in person is a principle as old as the human beings life, but it has beenfound necessary from time to time to define anew the exact nature and extent of such protection. As civilizationadvanced, an individual’s feelings and intellect, as well as his physical being, came within the scope of the legal“right to be let alone.”Iranian Constitution has guaranteed individual’s rights and freedom and has explicitly referred to forbiddance ofeavesdropping and interception of conversations in its article 25. Article 582 of Penal Code ratified in 1996 hascriminalized eavesdropping by the governmental officials. Article 104 of Criminal Procedure Code, which wasabolished in 2014, referred to eavesdropping under the judge’s order. Article 150 of new criminal procedure coderatified in 2014, and came into force in October 2014, has provided adequate safeguards to protect the individual’srights.

A Critique of Search and Seizure in Terms of a Search Warrant in South African Criminal Procedure: A Comparative Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 497-521
Author(s):  
Vinesh Basdeo
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
South African ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Search And Seizure ◽  
The South ◽  
Judicial Scrutiny ◽  
Search Warrant

The primary objective of this article is to determine whether the search and seizure measures employed in the South African criminal justice system are in need of any reform and/or augmentation in accordance with the ‘spirit, purport and object’ of the Constitution. This article analyses ‘search and seizure’ in the South African criminal justice system as is made possible by Chapter 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, which provides for search warrants, the entering of premises, and the seizure, of property connected with offences. It determines whether the required judicial scrutiny provides a real control upon the exercise of search and seizure powers. Search and seizure legal principles extracted from American criminal procedure will also be analysed for comparative purposes.

scholarly journals Policy Formulations of the Fisheries Criminal Act: An Investigation of the Authority of the Criminal Justice System in Indonesia

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 165
Author(s):  
Deassy J. A. Hehanussa ◽  
Koesno Adi ◽  
Masruchin Ruba’i ◽  
Pridja Djatmika
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Civil Servant ◽  
Maritime Security ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
National Police

Law enforcement implementation of fisheries criminal act especially for investigation based on Article 73 (1) of Law No. 45 of 2009 is executed by Fishery Civil Servant Investigator (PPNS), Investigator of Indonesian Navy officer and/or Investigator of Indonesian National Police. This investigation authority is called as attribution authority meaning that the authority is granted by the order of law. This regulation grants the same authority to these three institutions to investigate and submit their investigation report to public prosecutor without any cohesive system in its implementation. If it is linked to Law No. 8 of 1981 as an illustration of criminal justice system of Indonesia which is referred as the basis of common and specific criminal law enforcement, it emerges juridical weakness as a consequence of regulation inconsistency including conflict of norm between Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) and Fisheries Act. This inconsistency emerges conflict of authority among those investigators and emerges law indeterminacy. Hence, reformulate investigation authority of fisheries criminal act needs to be conducted along with paying attention on waters territory of Indonesia upon Law No. 6 of 1996 about Waters Territory of Indonesia despite law enforcement mechanism which had to be enforced corporately. This study result concludes that inconsistency of investigation authority formulation in fisheries criminal act in criminal justice system not only emerges fuzziness of norm but also conflict of norm between Law No. 8 of 1981 about Criminal Procedure Code and Law No. 45 of 2009. This emerges because there is an overlapping of investigation authority among 3 institutions, i.e., Fishery Civil Servant, Indonesian Navy and the Police. Formation team of Indonesian Maritime Security Coordinating Board (Bakorkamla) only has an authority as coordinating function. Hence, to maximize the law enforcement in the ocean, function of Indonesian Maritime Security Coordinating Board should be improved as a coordinator of law enforcement in ocean territory of Indonesia.

scholarly journals The ‘Equality Of Arms’ In Macedonian Criminal Procedure

SEEU Review ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-130
Author(s):  
Olga Kosevaliska
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Core Values ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Public Hearing ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Right

Abstract The right to a fair trial is implemented in our criminal procedure and is one of the core values of our criminal justice system. This right is absolute and can’t be limited on any legal base. Its essence is fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial court with guaranteeing of all the minimum rights of the defendant. One of those minimum rights is the right of equity of arms between the parties, the prosecutor and the defense. In our Law on Criminal Procedure, it is provided that the defense has the same rights and duties as the prosecutor except those rights that belong to the prosecutor as a state authority. Therefore, the purpose of this article is elaborating the right of ‘equity of arms’ and its misunderstanding in practice. Hence, we intend to show some case studies in which some evidence are not considered by the court just because they are not proposed by the prosecutor and they are crucial for the verdict.

scholarly journals IMPLIKASI PENAFSIRAN UNDANG-UNDANG OLEH HAKIM PRAPERADILAN DALAM PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 459
Author(s):  
Yusi Amdani
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
The Status

The judge in deciding a case can perform all the legal interpretation is not explicitly defined in the legislation. On the basis of any decision that has been set by the judge, then the decision must be accountable. But in Decision No:04/Pid.Prap/2015/PN.Jkt.Sel, Budi Gunawan pretrial matters related to the Commission, the judge has made a legal interpretation considered contrary to the Criminal Code itself. Judge did interpretation of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the status of Budi Gunawan as a suspect corruption. The decision has weak the authority of the Commission and the bad in the criminal justice system. Hakim dalam memutuskan suatu perkara dapat melakukan penafsiran hukum sepanjang belum ditentukan secara tegas dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Atas dasar setiap putusan yang telah ditetapkan oleh hakim, maka putusan tersebut harus dapat dipertanggungjawabkan. Namun dalam Putusan No: 04/Pid.Prap/2015/PN.Jkt.Sel, terkait perkara praperadilan Budi Gunawan terhadap KPK, hakim telah melakukan penafsiran hukum yang dinilai bertentangan dengan KUHAP sendiri. Hakim melakukan penafsiran terhadap KUHAP, atas status Budi Gunawan sebagai tersangka korupsi. Putusan tersebut telah melemahkan kewenangan KPK dan berakibat buruk dalam sistem peradilan pidana.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document