Constitutional aspects of the reform of the Polish justice system in 2017–2018

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 276-293
Author(s):  
Mateusz Radajewski

Summary The article concerns the issue of constitutionality of the reform of the justice system in Poland in 2017–2018, which resulted in significant changes of the functioning of the National Council of the Judiciary and the Supreme Court. When discussing the reform of the Supreme Court, the author first of all points to the constitutional problems associated with the premature retirement of some of its judges, which is also connected with the interruption of the six-year term of the First President of the Supreme Court. A separate issue discussed in the article is the introduction to the Supreme Court the lay judges, which is a unique phenomenon on the global scale. The analyses lead the author to formulate final conclusions, also referring to the European regulations and to refer to the unconstitutionality of the solutions adopted by the Polish parliament.

2020 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-132
Author(s):  
Dariusz Kużelewski

Abstract The objective of the paper is to present the role of the non-professional judge in Poland as an important manifestation of civic culture based on citizens’ activity in the sphere of justice among other things. The paper also highlights the importance of an appropriate selection of citizens who are to adjudicate and possibly place restrictions on access to judicial functions using the example of Polish law. The last part addresses the problem of the gradual reduction of the participation of lay judges in the Polish justice system and the controversial attempts to halt this trend, such as the introduction of lay judges to the Supreme Court and the start of discussions on the introduction of the justice of the peace to common courts.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-82
Author(s):  
Muhibuddin Muhibuddin ◽  
Mahdi Syahbandir ◽  
M. Nur Rasyid

Pasal 45A Ayat (2) huruf c Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 2004 tentang Mahkamah Agung membatasi pengajuan upaya hukum kasasi terhadap perkara tata usaha negara yang objek gugatannya berupa keputusan pejabat daerah. Pembatasan ini menimbulkan ketidakadilan bagi pencari keadilan (yustisiable) yang ingin mendapatkan keadilan jika pada tingkat pertama dan banding tidak diterima gugatannya. Di samping itu, pembatasan tersebut telah merubah sistem peradilan di Indonesia yang terdiri dari tingkat pertama, banding dan kasasi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui alasan pembatasan upaya hukum dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 2004, tinjauan keadilan kepada warga negara dan asas-asas pembentukan perundang-undangan yang baik. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis normatif  yang ingin mengidentifikasi dari aspek hukumnya. Data yang digunakan terdiri bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tersier. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pembatasan pengajuan upaya hukum untuk mengurangi penumpukan perkara di Mahkamah Agung. Akibat pembatasan tersebut sangat merugikan warga negara yang ingin memperjuangkan haknya dan tidak mencerminkan asas-asas pembentukan peraturan perundang-undangan yang baik.Article 45 (2) point C of the Act Number 5, 2004 on the Supreme Court Especially Limiting judicial review on the decision of the object of civil administrative state’s case which its lawsuit is the decision of officials in district, municipality or provincial officials. The limitation is not fair towards every justice seekers who are willing to obtain justices in the first court and the court of appeal have not tried the cases fairly. Apart from that the limitation has changed the justice system in Indonesia consisting of the first instance court, the court of appeal, and review court of the Supreme Court. This research aims to know the reasons of such limitation in the Act Number 5, 2004, justice review for citizens and principles of well law making. This is juridical normative research, which is trying to identify legal substances. The sources of data are secondary that are primary, secondary and tertiary legal sources. The research shows that the limitation of judicial review is to reduce the number of cases at the Supreme Court. The result of the nullification causes loss for citizens who are trying to fight for their rights and it does not reflect the principle of well law making process.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-302
Author(s):  
Wes Reber Porter

Our American criminal justice system is too often described as broken. It was not a clean break in a single, isolated location. Instead, our criminal justice system suffers from many, many little nicks, bumps, and bruises at the hands of its keepers. The evolution of sentencing enhancements within our criminal justice system represents the latest nagging, reoccurring injury. In the ultimate Trojan horse to criminal defendants, the Supreme Court sought to protect the individual rights of the accused with its recent decisions on sentencing enhancements. But at the hands of lawmakers, the judiciary, and prosecutors, criminal defendants suffer more. Our criminal justice system also suffers from practices related to sentencing enhancements and the resulting wave of wrongful convictions by guilty plea.


1969 ◽  
pp. 299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julianne Parfett

The common law has historically defined self- incrimination narrowly. Using Packer's models of the criminal justice system as a framework, the article examines the Supreme Court of Canada's interpretations of s. 24(2) of the Charter. The Court has expanded the definitions of both self incrimination and remoteness. The author argues that s. 24(2) has ceased to be a remedy requiring the balancing of interests and has become a quasi- automatic rule of exclusion, which promotes individual rights at the cost of victim's rights. Further, in the Court's zeal to protect the integrity of the system, there is no allowance made for the seriousness of the breach, the consequences of the exclusion, or the causal connection between the breach and any evidence obtained. The author argues that this has resulted in a justice system more concerned with police behaviour than with the pursuit of truth. Instead, either the exclusionary rule must be used to foster a balance of individual and communitarian rights, or other more imaginative remedies should be crafted from s. 24(2) to protect the integrity of the legal system.


Author(s):  
Tirza Mullin

The Eighth Amendment protects a criminal defendant’s right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. This Note argues that any punishment of eighteen- to twenty-five-year-olds is cruel and unusual without considering their youthfulness at every stage of the criminal process, and that it is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment for these youths to be automatically treated as fully-developed adults. This Note will explore in depth how juveniles differ from adults, both socially and scientifically, and how the criminal justice system fails every youth aged eighteen- to twenty-five by subjecting them to criminal, rather than juvenile, court without considering their youthfulness and diminished capacity. This Note proposes three reforms that, implemented together, aim to remedy this Eighth Amendment violation. First, the Supreme Court should apply the seminal cases of Miller, Roper, and Graham to eighteen- to twenty-five-year-olds. Second, all states should extend the age of juvenile jurisdiction to twenty-five, processing offenders twenty-five and younger through the juvenile system accordingly. Finally, every actor in the system—including courts, lawyers, and legislatures—should label eighteen- to twenty-five-year-olds as “youth” and consider their age at every stage of the criminal system.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Slamet Sarwo Edy

Peradilan militer adalah badan yang melaksanakan kekuasaan kehakiman di lingkungan TNI untuk menegakan hukum dan keadilan. Pengadilan militer tidak berpuncak dan tidak diawasi oleh markas besar TNI, tetapi berpuncak dan diawasi oleh MA RI. Filosofi terjadinya ketidakmandirian dalam sistem peradilan militer pertama, karena faktor kepentingan militer (TNI) yaitu berkaitan dengan tugas pokok TNI mempertahankan kedaulatan negara, oleh karena itu dengan menempatkan peran komandan satuan (Ankum) maupun lembaga kepaperaan didalam sistem penegakan hukum tersebut. Kedua, pada awal pembentukan organisasi peradilan militer menempatkan aparat peradilan sipil sebagai penjabat pada pengadilan militer. Ketua pengadilan negeri yang ditunjuk sebagai tempat kedudukan pengadilan tentara karena jabatannya menjadi ketua pengadilan tentara. Panitera pengadilan negeri juga menjabat sebagai panitera pengadilan tentara, kepala kejaksaan negeri ditetapkan sebagai jaksa tentara. Keadaan demikian menimbulkan keberatan-keberatan dengan alasan dipandang akan tidak menguntungkan bagi militer ataupun kesatuan militer. Peradilan militer ke depan harus mandiri baik secara kelembagaan maupun secara fungsional. Dalam konteks itu maka penyidik adalah polisi militer yang terdiri AD, AL dan AU, bertanggung jawab kepada Danpuspom TNI. Penuntutan dan pelimpahan perkara ke pengadilan dilaksanakan oleh oditur militer yang bertanggung jawab kepada Orjen TNI. Kewenangan pengadilan tidak lagi didasarkan kepada kepangkatan terdakwa. Pembinaan organisasi, administrasi, dan finansial pengadilan militer sepenuhnya berada dibawah MARI sebagaimana diatur dalam undang-undang.Military Court is the body that conduct the judicial power in the Indonesian Military Force (TNI) scope to enforce law and justice. The Military Court does not culminate and not supervised by the Indonesian Military Force headquarters, but culminates and is supervised by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The Philosophy of  the occurrence of dependence in the first military justice system, because of the interest of the military (TNI) which is associated with its principal task of TNI is to defend the national sovereignty, for that reason, by putting the role of commander of the unit (Ankum) as well as kepaperaan within the law enforcement system. The Head of the district court also covers Military Court in his jurisdiction because of it the Head of district court becomes the Head of Military Court. The Registrar is automatically also the Registrar of Military Court, Head of State Prosecutors assigned as military prosecutor. These circumstances affect objections which are seen as unfavorable for military or military units. The authority of the Court is no longer based on the rank of the defendant, the hierarchy of court proceedings such as judges, military Prosecutors, defense attorneys, no longer use the rank but wearing a toga. Development of organizational, administrative, financial of Military Courts is fully under the Supreme Court held consequently as stipulated in the law of judicial power.  The execution of criminal act by military prison, executed equally as prisoner without discriminating the person by his rank. 


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 487
Author(s):  
Sigit Prihanto

Handling the criminal case related to the land both by investigators, prosecutors and judges must advance the exact seat keperdataannya legal status. The handling of criminal cases the object of land should be done carefully and cautiously through the understanding of the anatomy of the case and from the evidence of civil owned by the parties. It aims to prevent the engineering / coercion case which is basically a pure civil dispute, eventually used as criminal assault. To deal with this phenomenon, law enforcement agencies have issued policies on formulatif / legislation containing about pending examination of crime related / object land. At the level of the Supreme Court there is a Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 1956 and the Supreme Court Decision Number 628K / Pid / 1984. At the level of the Attorney General has issued Circular Letter of the Attorney General for General Crimes No. B-230 / E / EJP / 01/2013. While in the police has been no regulatory policies relating thereto. However, in practice the investigators make policies and regulations issued by the Supreme Court and the Attorney General as guidance in handling the criminal case related to the land. It is for the sake of effectiveness and efficiency in the framework of an integrated criminal justice system. While in the police has been no regulatory policies relating thereto. However, in practice the investigators make policies and regulations issued by the Supreme Court and the Attorney General as guidance in handling the criminal case related to the land. It is for the sake of effectiveness and efficiency in the framework of an integrated criminal justice system. While in the police has been no regulatory policies relating thereto. However, in practice the investigators make policies and regulations issued by the Supreme Court and the Attorney General as guidance in handling the criminal case related to the land. It is for the sake of effectiveness and efficiency in the framework of an integrated criminal justice system.Keywords: Offense; Land; Police.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document