Court Decisions in the Russian Criminal Procedure: Theoretical Bases, Legislation and Practice : Monograph

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. V. Beliaev
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions

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.

scholarly journals PROSECUTOR'S SUPERVISION OF LAW CONDUCTING INVESTIGATIVE (SEARCH) ACTIONS

2020 ◽  
pp. 377-386
Author(s):  
Я. Ю. Конюшенко
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Law ◽  
Procedural Guidance ◽  
Compliance With The Law ◽  
The Relationship

The purpose of the article is to define the prosecutor's supervision over investigative (search) actions as a legal guarantee of human rights, as well as problematic issues in its implementation and to make proposals to improve the current criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine. The article defines doctrinal approaches to the concepts of "prosecutor's supervision over compliance with the law during the pre-trial investigation" and "prosecutor's procedural guidance of the pre-trial investigation" in the context of investigative (search) actions. The author came to the conclusion that the provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine "On the Prosecutor's Office" and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in terms of regulating the functions and powers of the prosecutor during the pre-trial investigation. Based on the study, it is proposed to consider procedural guidance as one of the forms of prosecutor's supervision over the pre-trial investigation, which is implemented directly by the prosecutor or a group of prosecutors who are appointed to carry it out in a particular criminal proceeding. The author also emphasizes the existence of forms of supervision of the highest level prosecutor on the legality of these actions, which are implemented through the demand and study of information on the progress and results of pre-trial investigation, criminal proceedings and certified copies of court decisions and study of compliance with criminal procedure. A number of problematic issues during the prosecutor's supervision in pre-trial criminal proceedings are outlined, which relate to the relationship between the prosecutor's supervision and judicial control over the legality of investigative (search) actions; subjects and subject of supervision of the prosecutor in this sphere; providing the prosecutor-procedural manager and prosecutors of the highest level with instructions and instructions during the investigative (search) actions. To address these issues, it is proposed to amend the current criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine. The study of the materials of criminal proceedings and the survey of the subjects of criminal proceedings indicate the existence of a number of problematic issues that exist during the implementation of the prosecutor's procedural guidance of investigative (search) actions in the context of human rights.

SHORTENED TIMELINE OF APPEAL AGAINST INTERIM COURT DECISIONS MADE AT A PRE-TRIAL STAGE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Polina O. Gertsen ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Medical Organization ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the problem of classifying interim decisions among those that are appealed in a shortened timeline, and determining the list of such decisions, as well as the closely related problem of determining the rules for calculating such a shortened timeline. Currently, the Criminal Procedure law provides for the possibility of appealing a number of interim decisions made at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings before the final decision Moreover, for appealing some interim decisions at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings, a general period of appeal is provided - 10 days from the date of the court decision, or the same period from the date of serving with a copy of the decision the person who is in custody, while for others a shortened timeline is 3 days from the date of the decision. Meanwhile, it follows from the literal interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation that within a shortened three-day period, court decisions on the election of preventive measures in the form of a ban on certain actions, bail, house arrest, detention, the refusal to apply them or extend their application can be appealed. At the same time, such a conclusion is not confirmed either in the positions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation or in judicial practice. Based on the analysis of the criminal procedure law, the position of the Supreme and Constitutional Courts of the Russian Federation, scientific literature and practice, several problems are highlighted. Thus, the author states the discrepancy between the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation when it comes to establishing the terms for appealing the court decision on a preventive measure in the form of bail. In addition, there is no single criterion for establishing shortened deadlines for appealing interim decisions, and there-fore, the list of such decisions requires analysis. In addition, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not contain a norm that determines the rules for calculating daily terms. The author formulates several proposals for amendments. It is proposed to determine the criteria for a shortened appeal timeline as the restriction of the constitutional right to liberty and immunity of a person that requires the immediate judicial review of the lawfulness of such a decision. It is also necessary to correct the phrasing of Article 106 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the procedure for applying a preventive measure in the form of bail, and establish the rule that appeal against such an interim court decision is filed according to the rules of Chapter 45.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code within ten days. The list of court decisions which must be appealed in a shortened timeline must be expanded by a court decision on putting a suspect or an accused into a medical organization providing medical or psychiatric care in hospital settings for forensic examination, as well as the extension of a person’s stay in a medical organization. In addition, the author has analyzed the approaches to the calculation of daily terms and proposes to amend Part 1 of Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation by establishing a single procedure for calculating daily terms, which does not take into account the day that served as a starting point of the term.

scholarly journals URGENSI DAN PENGATURAN UU TENTANG CONTEMPT OF COURT UNTUK MENJAMIN HARKAT, MARTABAT DAN WIBAWA PERADILAN

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aditya Wisnu Mulyadi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Good Attitude

The phenomenon of the Contempt of Court is an event that is rife in Indonesia lately. It is considered to reduce the dignity, majesty and authority of the judiciary and its apparatus. Particularly the dignity and authority of the judge. Attitudes and actions displayed by the search for justice, legal practitioners, the press, political and social organizations, NGOs, academics, judicial commission, as well as various other parties in such a way can be categorized injure the dignity, majesty and authority of the judiciary, good attitude and actions directed against the judicial process, judicial officials, as well as court decisions. Lack of strict legal instruments and adequate to serve as guidelines and benchmarks to judge such a phenomenon is made Contempt of Court always the case. View of the judge is an arm of God would have been contrary to Contempt of Court. The judge in charge of prosecuting and providing justice for justice seekers should not accept the bad treatments. This study is based on normative research method using statutory approach and conceptual approaches. Legislation that used is Law No. 4 of 1985 on the Supreme Court, Code of criminal law, the law book of the law of criminal procedure, the draft book of the Criminal Justice Act 2012 and draft the Code of Criminal Procedure 2012. This research is expected to contribute significantly for the creation benchmarks and appropriate guidelines in terms of the establishment of regulations and legislation on Contempt of Court Act

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTASI TUGAS HAKIM PENGAWAS DAN PENGAMAT DALAM PENGAWASAN DAN PENGAMATAN TERHADAP NARAPIDANA (Kajian di Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Klas II A Purwokerto)

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dessy Perdani Yuris PS
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Internal Resistance ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court

The implementation of court judgments needs to be observed and perceived, thus the birth of Supervisor and Observer Judge Institution by Law No. 8 of 1981. The position of a Judge is not simply responsible for imposition of punishment, but also have to responsible for completion of punishment term by inmates in Correctional Institute by appropriate pattern and program of counseling. Besides in article 277 KUHAP till article 288 KUHAP it is charged another task as supervisor and observer of the court decision. The research results show that the implementation of the Supervisory Judge task and Observers in the execution of court decisions in Purwokerto Penitentiary is based on the Criminal Procedure Code Article 277 through Article 283 Criminal Procedure Code, the implementing regulations of the Supreme Court Circular No. RI. No. 7 of 1985. Supervisory Judge in the performance of duties and Observers in Purwokerto Penitentiary still met the constraints that are internal or external, internal resistance from law enforcement and the factors of factor means or facilities. Then the external barriers are the ruling factor.Keywords : Supervisor and Observer Judge, Purwokerto Penitentiary and prisoner

scholarly journals Authority of Prosecutor as the Executor of Judge’s Decision Stating That the Evidence Is Confiscated for the State; Criminal Act in the Excise Field

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 131
Author(s):  
Corinna Patricia ◽  
Yoserwan Yoserwan ◽  
A Irzal Rias
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
The State ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Regional Office ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Executive Authority ◽  
Directorate General

The objectives of the current study are: 1) to identify and analyze the authority of prosecutor as the executor of judge’s decision on the spoils resulting from criminal act of excise, 2) to find out and analyze the arrangements regarding the coordination of the prosecutor as the executor with the Director of Enforcement and Investigation/ Head of the Regional Office of the Directorate General of Customs and Excise related to the execution of the judge’s decision stating that the evidence is confiscated for the state in criminal act in the excise field. This study applies a qualitative approach and uses secondary and primary data as support. The results of the study show that: (1) the executive authority of the prosecutor to carry out court decisions that have permanent legal force in criminal cases is regulated in Articles 270 to 276 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The provisions of Article 270 of the Criminal Procedure Code are in line with the provisions described in Article 54 paragraph (1) of Law No. 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Powers that the implementation of court decisions in criminal cases is carried out by prosecutor. Then, the implementation of court decisions in cases of criminal acts in the excise field still refers to the Criminal Procedure Code because the Excise Law does not specifically determine the party authorized to carry out the execution of state booty in excise crimes, (2) the execution of judge’s decision stating evidence confiscated for the state in a criminal act in the excise field does not include regulations regarding the coordination of the prosecutor as executor with the Director of Enforcement/Head of Regional Office of the Directorate of Customs and Excise Enforcement and Investigation.

REVIEW OF CASES ON NEWLY OPENED AND NEW CIRCUMSTANCES: UNFA-VOURABLE DISTINCTIONS OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 105-114
Author(s):  
Alia R. Sharipova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The article deals with the comparative analysis of the procedure and grounds for reviewing court cases under new and newly discovered circumstances in criminal and arbitration, civil and administrative proceedings. The author proceeds from the idea of common fundamental beginnings of justice in general, and therefore, all types of judicial activities - including an extraordinary review of judicial decisions, which have entered into legal force. The branch specifics of specific procedural institutions should have a special explanation based on the specifics of the branch itself. The author thinks that there is no key basis for reviewing the case on the newly discovered circumstances in the criminal trial and attempts to replace it with one of the new circumstances. In this part, the current criminal procedure law differs unfavourably from the Soviet Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) of the RSFSR of 1960 - among the newly discovered circumstances, there are no those that could indicate a miscarriage of justice made out of direct connection with someone's criminal actions. In the current CPC of the Russian Federation, the list of newly discovered circumstances is closed, and the list of new circumstances that entail the review of the court decisions is, on the contrary, open. Examples of academic papers and administrative enactments justifying such a replacement are given. The author gives his arguments against it and proposes to change the list of grounds for revision, referring to the regulation in other procedural branches, historical and foreign experience. A significant procedural difference of the considered type of extraordinary review of cases in criminal proceedings from other types of proceedings is found. It is the need for applicants to request a review from the prosecutor, not from the court. The greatest objection is the non-alternative procedure: the prosecutor is a participant in the criminal proceedings on the part of the prosecution, he is responsible for the undoubted proof of the charge, which is the basis of the sentence, the abolition of which is requested by another interested person. The negative impact of the prosecutor's mediation between the complainant and the court on access to justice and its quality is argued. It is pointed out that there is no need for prosecutorial checks to resolve the issue of judicial review of the case. The analysis of judicial statistics in different branches of justice shows that criminal proceedings differ sharply by the negligible number of judicial review cases due to newly discovered and new circumstances. The article calls into question the ability to explain this fact by a higher quality of sentences in criminal cases in comparison with other court decisions in other court cases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document