scholarly journals STUDY ON LAW RELATING TO MAINTENANCE IN INDIA WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO PERSONAL LAWS AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE.

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. 208-216
Author(s):  
SanjayI Solanki. ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Special Reference ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code

scholarly journals Comparative Study on the Pre-trial Detention with Reference to the New Hungarian Code on Criminal Procedure

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-178
Author(s):  
Robert Bartko ◽  
András Payrich
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Special Reference ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Investigation ◽  
Legal Traditions ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Government

Summary The decision of legislating the new Criminal Procedure Code made by the Hungarian Government in 2015 was necessary with special reference to the new forms of criminality and criminal investigation. The conception of the new Code on Criminal Procedure (hereinafter: new Code) was accepted by the Government on 11 February in 2015. The directives of the conception were the followings: efficiency, rapidity, simplicity, up-to-dateness, coherency and expediency. Not only the European but also the international requirements and the Hungarian legal traditions were followed by the legislation. Two years after the mentioned decision the new Code was adopted on 13 June 2017, and it will come into force on 1 July 2018. It shall be underlined that many procedural rules will be modified or changed in the new Code. The aim of this study to highlight some changes and amendments in the field of the coercive actions with special reference to the pre-trial detention. The characteristic of the paper will be the analytical and comparative method, and it deals with not only the Act on Criminal Procedure in force (Act XIX of 1998, hereinafter: Act in force), but also the new Code (Act CX of 2017) as well.

Maximum Duration of the Measures of Remand Detention in Custody and House Arrest in Criminal Cases

De Jure ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Salkova ◽  
◽  
Yanko Roychev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
Maximum Duration ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Maximum Period

The maximum duration of the detention in custody and house arrest measures in criminal cases is researched. A number of issues have been considered regarding the calculation of the term and its initial and final moments, including the hypotheses related to the returning of the case to the prosecutor by the court, the taking of the measures against an accused party detained on different grounds, as well as in view of a modification of the legal qualification of the indictment, establishing a different maximum duration under Art. 63, para. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Code. An emphasis has been placed on the disputable aspect of the duration of the period in regard to underage accused parties. A necessity to introduce a maximum period of detention in custody and house arrest,including also the court phase of the trial, has been acknowledged.

Media Arbitration Schemes: Addressing the Backlog of Defamation Cases in Malaysia

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Imaduddin Suhaimi
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
High Court ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Alternative Proposal ◽  
Salient Features

Abstract The rise in defamation claims in Malaysia has placed an onerous workload on the courts to deal with such matters. Against this backdrop, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer JC (as his Lordship then was) (Hamid Sultan JC) suggested in two separate High Court decisions that to alleviate the courts’ burden, matters pertaining to libel and slander ought to be constrained to the criminal courts through appropriate statutory amendments, including to the Criminal Procedure Code (Malaysia). In this paper, the author cautions against the learned Hamid Sultan JC's recommendations and proffers an alternative proposal in the form of media arbitration schemes to handle the growing influx of defamation claims. In particular, the salient features of the IMPRESS and IPSO Schemes from the United Kingdom are scrutinised in detail and measured in terms of suitability for a potential arbitration scheme in the Malaysian jurisdiction.

Ensuring the Rights and Legal Interests of the Victim when Checking the Crime Report: A Comparative Legal Analysis of the Criminal Procedure Codes of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China

2021 ◽  
pp. 128-133
Author(s):  
Irina G. Smirnova ◽  
◽  
Ekaterina V. Alekseeva ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Procedure Codes

The article presents a comparative legal analysis of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Procedure Code of the People’s Republic of China, which regulate the rights and powers of the victim within the framework of the stage of initiating a criminal case. The authors highlight several significant differences in the legal regulation of this issue. The differences are: the obligation to comply with the rules of jurisdiction in China at the stage of filing a statement of a crime, which is not required under the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; compulsory fingerprinting of a person when filing a crime report with a public security agency implemented in China; the existence of several types of preliminary checks (the list of activities carried out as part of these checks in China is open); intensive development of IT technologies and their introduction into the life of society, including for the fight against crime and ensuring law and order in society, in China.

To the Matter of Procedural and Legal Problems of Detaining a Person on Suspicion of Committing a Crime

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.V. Bolshakov ◽  
◽  
I.D. Nazarov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Moment

The subject of the research within the framework of the article is the criminal procedure institute for the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime. The legal nature of this institution is analyzed, and comments are given on the normative legal acts and judicial practice regulating the issues of detention. The theoretical basis of the research is based on the publications of the last two decades on this problem, in particular, reflecting the discussion of the process scientists S. A. Shafer, S. B. Rossinsky and A. A. Tarasov, the subject of which was the issue of the legal nature of a suspect detention in a criminal case. In the paper, the authors ask the following questions: What is the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation? From what moment does the detained person acquire the status of a suspect? Is it possible to detain a person before initiating a criminal case? The study concludes that a person acquires the actual status of a suspect from the moment of direct detention, that is, before documenting this status and, as a result, before initiating a criminal case. Amendments to the articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are proposed, and the authors` versions of the definitions of the concepts «detention of a suspect», «the moment of actual detention» and «pre-trial proceedings» are given.

USING RESULTS OF STING OPERATION IN CRIMINAL CASES PROVING

2021 ◽  
pp. 132-136
Author(s):  
Кирилл Иванович ЛАРИН
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Sting Operation

В статье рассматриваются проблемные вопросы, связанные с использованием в качестве доказательств результатов оперативного эксперимента. Предлагается отказаться от проведения оперативного эксперимента по инициативе оперативных подразделений и допустить его проведение исключительно в рамках рассмотрения сообщения о преступлении, на основании поручения следователя Следственного комитета в порядке статьи 144 УПК РФ. The article deals with problematic issues associated with the use of the results of an operational experiment as evidence. It is proposed to refuse to conduct an operational experiment on the initiative of operational units and allow it to be conducted exclusively within the framework of considering a report on a crime, on the basis of an order from an investigator of the Investigative Committee in accordance with Article 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Search in Criminal Procedure of Russia and Germany: Comparative Legal Characteristics

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 01159
Author(s):  
Anton Shamne
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Federal Republic Of Germany ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Similarities And Differences

The article compares the Criminal Procedural Codes provisions of the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Germany that regulate conducting a search as an investigative act. It also provides and compares the definitions of the concept “search” and “dwelling” given in Russian and German criminal procedural legislation. The reasons for conducting the search in general and the search of dwelling are considered, similarities and differences are revealed in relation to the status of the subject who is under the search. The author characterizes the search of dwelling and gives a comparative analysis of this investigative action as well as the notion of “urgent cases” in both countries. The authors also proposed some brief recommendations for improving the norms of the Russian Federation Criminal Procedure Code.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document