scholarly journals The Right of the Accused to Compensation in the Iranian Criminal Justice System

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 76
Author(s):  
Mansour Rahmdel
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
International Conventions ◽  
Rule Out

<em>Normally, the right to compensation refers to the victim’s compensation. The legislator also typically refers to the right to it, as the Iranian Criminal Procedure Code has done so in articles 14 and 15. But the present paper, refers not to the victim’s, but the accused right. The Criminal Procedure Code of 1912 and 1999 referred to the possibility of compensating the accused by the iniquitous private complainant. However, none of them referred to the government’s obligation to compensate to the innocent accused. In contrast, the Penal Code of 2014 stipulates the government’s obligation to compensate the defendant for damages, but does not rule out the possibility of compensation by iniquitous complainant. Certainly, it does not exempt the complainant to compensation. Reaffirming the responsibility of the government to offset the losses of innocent accused, in line with international conventions, is one of the highlights of the new code. But the lack of compensation for unjustified detention is one of the gaps in the new code. This paper proposes that the Iranian new code of criminal procedure, serves as a development in respecting the accused right in creating comprehensive compensation schemes.</em>

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.

scholarly journals Victimological Approaches to Crime of Rape in Indonesian Criminal Justice System

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 366
Author(s):  
Khudzaifah Dimyati ◽  
Angkasa Angkasa
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Rape Victims ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Sense Of Justice

Neglect of rape victims in the Indonesian Criminal Justice System implicates at least two things; first, the victim does not receive legal protection, and second, the decisions of judges do not fulfill the sense of justice. Neglect of victims in the Criminal Justice System cannot be separated from the theory, doctrine and legislation, especially criminal law or the Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and the Corrections Act, which is oriented merely to the perpetrators (criminal oriented) instead of victims (victim oriented). Regarding the conditions above, this study was intended to provide a solution of the problems so that victims in the Criminal Justice System obtain legal protection and the decision of judges could fulfill the sense of justice.

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 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 A Critical Study on Implementation of Section 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code with reference to the Rights of the Victims

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (9) ◽  
pp. 45-56
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Critical Study ◽  
Legal Service ◽  
Procedure Code

It is a weakness of our jurisprudence that the victims of the crimes, and the distress of the dependants of the prisoner, do not attract the attention of the law .The District Legal Service Authority (DLSA) or the State Legal Service Authority (SLSA) needs to decide the quantum of compensation to be given under the scheme. Section 357A was a necessary enactment, and is useful, because the victim need not prove his case to get compensation under this section, which should hasten the process, but unfortunately the scheme is not being implemented completely. This paper analyses the plight of the victims of crimes under the Indian Criminal Justice System, and the importance of section 357A for protection of their rights. It further argues that that the scheme is not being implemented properly, and there is a lack of uniformity in the statute of each state. The verification procedure of these states is justified only if it does not hinder the compensation of a genuine victim. It explains the importance of immediate compensation, and the role of judiciary in the journey from the enactment to implementation of any scheme and statute. This paper concludes by suggesting changes that could be brought into the Indian Criminal judicial system for the betterment of the victim’s right and society atlarge.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTASI ASAS LEX SPECIALIS DEROGAT LEGI GENERALI DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA

2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 503
Author(s):  
Shinta Agustina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
Cumulative Model

This study aims to assess and analyze the application of the principle of lex specialis the derogat legi generali in the Criminal Justice System related to the stages in the criminal justice process, and the form of the indictment in applying the principle of lex specialis the derogat legi generali. The method used is empirical juridical with descriptive analytical. The result shows that this principle is applied in criminal cases that violating the general and special criminal provisions in the Penal Code, the general criminal provisions in the Penal Code and special criminal provisions outside the Penal Code, as well as criminal cases that violating two special criminal acts outside the Penal Code. Regarding the fase of criminal procedure in handling the case under this principle, it is implemented in the adjudication process, using the subsidiarity or cumulative model of chargingPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji dan menganalisis penerapan asas lex specialis derogat legi generali dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana terkait dengan tahapan dalam proses peradilan pidana, dan bentuk surat dakwaan dalam menerapkan asas lex xpecialis derogat legi generali tersebut. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode  yuridis empiris yang bersifat deskriptif analitis. Hasil penelitian memperlihatkan bahwa asas lex specialis derogat legi generali diterapkan dalam perkara pidana yang mempertemukan ketentuan pidana umum dan khusus dalam KUHP, ketentuan pidana umum dalam KUHP dan ketentuan pidana khusus di luar KUHP, serta perkara pidana yang mempertemukan dua atau lebih ketentuan pidana khusus di luar KUHP. Berkenaan dengan tahapan dalam sistem peradilan pidana, asas ini diterapkan dalam tahap adjudication, yang mengharuskan surat dakwaan dibuat dalam model subsidiaritas atau kumulatif

scholarly journals The House Always Wins: Systemic Disadvantage for Criminal Defendants and the Case against the Prosecutorial Veto

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan G. Hall
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Annual Review ◽  
Trial Judge ◽  
Criminal Justice Reform ◽  
Criminal Defendant ◽  
The Right

102 Cornell L. Rev. 1717 (2017)In the Preface to the 44th Annual Review of Criminal Procedure, Judge Alex Kozinski levels a number of criticisms against the modern American criminal justice system. Central among those criticisms is his assessment of the fundamental imbalance in criminal trials between the prosecution and the defense: “[W]e like to boast that our criminal justice system is heavily tilted in favor of criminal defendants because we’d rather that ten guilty men go free than an innocent man be convicted. There is reason to doubt it, because very few criminal defendants actually go free after trial.” Judge Kozinski’s concern—that the system is rigged to some degree in favor of the prosecution—is a relatively common one among defense attorneys and criminal justice reform advocates. Less common, however, are the specific measures Judge Kozinski proposes to ameliorate the criminal justice system’s flaws. One of his proposals that would work to rectify this imbalance centers on the right of the accused to receive a trial from his peers:Give criminal defendants the choice of a jury or bench trial . . . The prosecution has many institutional advantages, not the least being that they get to go first and thus have their theory of the case laid out before the defendant can present any evidence at all. I would think it fair to let the defendant get the choice of judge or jury.In many states, when a criminal defendant wants to waive the right to a jury trial in favor of a bench trial, the defendant must first obtain the consent of the prosecutor. Scholars and practitioners frequently call the refusal of that consent the “prosecutorial veto,” and what Judge Kozinski proposes is its complete elimination from criminal procedure. The primary goal of this Note is to analyze the merits of that proposal. The Note will provide the relevant legal background to the issue, including the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on the prosecutorial veto in Part I, and the various federal and state statutory approaches to the issue in Part II. Then, in Part III, the Note will consider the merits of Judge Kozinski’s proposal to eliminate the prosecutorial veto by exploring the policy arguments for it. Finally, in Part IV, the Note will make the case against the prosecutorial veto. The Note will conclude by agreeing with Judge Kozinski’s proposal and arguing for its adoption.

scholarly journals THE RIGHT OF AN ACCUSED TO DEFENCE UNDER THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN MALAYSIA

2022 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-58
Author(s):  
Mohd Safri Mohammed Na’aim ◽  
Ramalinggam Rajamanickam ◽  
Rohaida Nordin
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Trial ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Right

Background and Purpose: Under the criminal justice system, the burden lies on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused. It is worth noting that a criminal trial is not one-sided; it also allows the accused to raise his defence to prove his innocence. The research aims to analyse the right of the accused to raise a defence and when the defence should be raised in a criminal trial process in Malaysia.   Methodology: This research adopts a legal research approach involving a detailed analysis of the relevant legal provisions, case law and scholarly writing related to this area.   Findings: The research found that the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) (Act 593) is silent as to when the defence should be raised. That being said, with reference to the Supreme Court’s case of Lin Lian Chen v. Public Prosecutor [1992] 1 CLJ 285 (Rep), the accused should introduce his defence at the earliest stage as possible. Failing this may give rise to the presumption that the defence raised was a mere invention. Although the principle has been regarded as a law in raising defence, there are still cases where the accused did not present the defence at an earlier stage.   Contributions: This research contributes to the corpus of legal knowledge of criminal defence, particularly on raising criminal defence in a criminal trial with the aim of providing better protection for the accused in the criminal justice system. Keywords: Criminal justice system, criminally liable, defence, right of the accused, & criminal trial.   Cite as: Mohammed Na’aim, M. S., Rajamanickam, R., & Nordin, R. (2022). The right of an accused to defence under the criminal justice system in Malaysia. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 7(1), 43-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol7iss1pp43-58

scholarly journals Peran Advokat Sebagai Penegak Hukum Dalam Mendukung Terwujudnya Sistem Peradilan Pidana Terpadu Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana Di Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Setyo Langgeng
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Real Place ◽  
Procedure Code

AbstrakKeberadaan Advokat sebagai penegak hukum telah diatur didalam Pasal 5 Undang-undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 18 Tahun 2003 tentang Advokat. Namun, mengenai bagaimana bentuk dan tempat nyata peran Advokat sebagai penegak hukum masih samar, khususnya dalam perannya sebagai komponen pendukung terwujudnya sistem peradilan pidana terpadu, akibatnya penegakan hukum pidana di Indonesia belum optimal. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif atau studi kepustakaan, yaitu dengan menganalisa UU.RI. No. 18 tahun 2003 tentang Advokat dan UU.RI No. 8 tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP), serta peraturan perundang-undangan lainya dan bahan pustaka yang terkait dengan peran Advokat guna menjawab permasalahan. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa dari segi bentuk dan tempatnya, terdapat 2 (dua) peran Advokat sebagai penegak hukum, yaitu (1) Peran Advokat dalam bentuk pendampingan hukum terhadap pelaku berdasar Pasal 54 KUHAP, (2) Peran Advokat dalam bentuk pendampingan hukum terhadap korban yang diatur diluar KUHAP. Diharapkan sebagai bahan masukan bagi penegak hukum dalam penegakan hukum dan keadilan di Idonesia.Kata kunci : Advokat, Penegak Hukum, Sistem Peradilan Pidana Terpadu�AbsractThe existence of Advocates as law enforcement has been regulated in Article 5 of Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 18 Year 2003 regarding Advocate. However, regarding how the form and the real place of the Advocate role as law enforcement is still vague, especially in its role as a supporting component of the establishment of integrated criminal justice system, consequently the enforcement of criminal law in Indonesia is not optimal yet. This research uses normative legal research method or literature study, that is by analyzing UU.RI. No. Law No. 18 of 2003 on Advocates and Law no. 8 of 1981 on Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), as well as other legislation and library materials related to the role of Advocates in order to answer the problem. The result of research shows that in terms of form and place, there are 2 (two) Advocates role as law enforcers, namely (1) Role of Advocate in the form of legal assistance to the perpetrator based on Article 54 KUHAP, (2) Role of Advocate in the form of legal assistance to the victims is regulated outside the Criminal Procedure Code. It is expected to be an input for law enforcement in law enforcement and justice in Indonesia.Keywords : Advocate, Law Enforcement, Integrated Criminal Justice System

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document