scholarly journals Access to a Lawyer for Suspects at the Police Station and During Detention Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-151
Author(s):  
Tymon Markiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Police Station ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Main Statement ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer lays down minimum standards concerning access to a lawyer for suspects and the accused in criminal proceedings, as well as persons subject to the European arrest warrant proceedings. The present article focus on the subject of access to a lawyer at the earliest stage of criminal proceedings – in connection with arrest as well as during proceedings concerning the use of pre-trial detention. Author analyzes in sequence: subjective scope of the right to a lawyer, the right to a lawyer for the person deprived of liberty, confidentiality of communications between the person deprived of liberty and their lawyer. The main statement is that Poland does not meet that standard.

scholarly journals The Right to Defence in Poland. Remarks on the Latest Amendments of the Code of Criminal Procedure from the European Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-107
Author(s):  
Marek Ryszard Smarzewski
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
European Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Made In

The article discusses the issue of standards of the right to defence and takes into account the recent amendments of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The analysis is conducted against the background of minimum standards of the right to defence set out under European law. A reference introduced to the title of the Code includes the assertion that the legislator has implemented the provisions of Directive of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty as well as Directive of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings. However, it should be emphasized in this context that as a result of changes made in the discussed scope in the years 2016-2019, the legislator not only failed to fully implement the aforementioned Directives, but even introduced modifications that led to lowering the standards of the right to defence and guarantees of its implementation, both in material as well as formal terms.

scholarly journals Restriction of the access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
pp. 58-69
Author(s):  
Tatiana Topilina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

This article analyzes the problems of implementation of the right of access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The author carefully examines the legislation of the countries of post-Soviet space on filing a complaint against actions (omissions), as well as decisions of the prosecuting agency in pretrial proceedings. The subject of this research is the norms of the Russian and foreign legislation that regulate the right of access to justice in criminal proceedings. The object is the legal relations arising in the context of implementation of the right of access to justice. The article employs the universal systemic method of cognition; comparative-legal, formal-legal, and statistical methods; as well as logical analysis of the normative legal acts. It is indicated that restriction of the access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is also established by the practice developed in law enforcement for evaluation of the complaint prior to its consideration involving  the parties with the possibility of making a decision on whether to remit or reject the complaint in the absence of legislatively specified grounds, which directly affects the number of addressed complaints. The conclusion is made on the need to specify the grounds for remitting the complaint of an applicant filed in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, for the purpose of excluding the possibility of decision made by the court that is not based on the law on remitting or rejecting the complaint for consideration (the Article 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

scholarly journals Letter of Rights for Persons Arrested on the Basis of a European Arrest Warrant: A Novelty Under the Directive 2012/13/Eu

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Libor Klimek
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Framework Decision ◽  
Fundamental Knowledge ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The paper deals with a Letter of rights for persons arrested on the basis of a European arrest warrant, a novelty introduced by the Directive 2012/13/ EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings. The Directive stipulates that Member States of the EU shall ensure that persons who are arrested for the purpose of the execution of an European arrest warrant are provided promptly with appropriate Letter of rights containing information on their rights according to the law implementing the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant in the executing Member State. The paper is divided into three sections. First section presents fundamental knowledge on starting points of the letter of rights. Further, second section analyses its legal basis, i.e. Directive 2012/13/EU. The last third section introduces an indicative model of letter of rights.

Provision of the access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation

2021 ◽  
pp. 37-48
Author(s):  
Tatiana Topilina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Time Constraint ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Court Hearing

This article analyzes the problems of exercising the right of access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation. The author examines the legislation of post-Soviet countries in terms of provision the access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation. The subject of this research is the norms of Russian and foreign legislation that regulate to right of access to justice in criminal proceedings. The object of this research is the legal relations that emerge in implementation of the right of access to justice. It its demonstrated that the restriction on access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation instance is the time constraint for filing cassation appeal for the convict; and for consideration of interlocutory court decisions – the procedure for assessing cassation appeal without holding a court hearing. The conclusion is substantiated on the need to waive the time constraint for filing cassation appeal for the convict against final court decisions that have entered into force, and for consideration of interim court decisions, the procedure for assessing cassation appeal against the interlocutory court decision should be eliminated without holding a court hearing.

The Europeanization of the Criminal Proceedings in the Republic of Croatia through the Implementation of the Directive 2013/48/EU

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-125
Author(s):  
Ante Novokmet
Keyword(s):  
Special Reference ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Practical Implications

The Act on Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act (NN 70/2017) introduced, into the Croatian legal system, the Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and European arrest warrant proceedings as well as the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty. This paper contains the analysis of the nomotechnical solutions after the implementation of the Directive 2013/48/EU in the Republic of Croatia. In addition, particular attention has been given to the new substantive term of the suspect and its practical implications in different stages of the Croatian criminal procedure with special reference to effects and perception of the implementation of the Directive 2013/48/EU in Croatian criminal procedure. The paper criticizes some domestic legal solutions and offer different approach, with respect to the trends that have been noticed after amendment of the Croatian Criminal Procedure Act.

scholarly journals Directive 2013/48/EU and the Requested Person’s Right to Appoint a Lawyer in the Issuing Member State in European Arrest Warrant Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-33
Author(s):  
Vincent Glerum
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Dual Representation ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Framework Decision ◽  
Limited Role ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

Directive 2013/48/EU gives persons who are subject to European arrest warrant proceedings the right to “dual representation”: not only the right of access to a lawyer in the executing Member State but also the right to appoint a lawyer in the issuing Member State, whose limited role it is to provide information and advice to the lawyer in the executing Member State with a view to the effective exercise of the requested person’s rights under Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA. The right to appoint a lawyer in the issuing Member State is supposed to contribute to facilitating judicial cooperation. This article takes a closer look at that right and tries to establish whether – and, if so, to what extent – that right does indeed facilitate judicial cooperation. 

scholarly journals Wpływ nieimplementowanych do systemu prawnego Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej dyrektyw unijnych na gwarancje procesowe

2017 ◽  
pp. 37-56
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Mróz
Keyword(s):  
Point Of View ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
The Right ◽  
Subjective Rights ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Right Of Access

This article deals with the issue of the direct effect of EU instruments from the point of view of the constitutional system of sources of law. Ensuring the „effet utile” of Community law entails the requirement for the effective realization of the subjective rights resulting from that right. Undoubtedly the effects of breaching obligations to implement EU law, in particular the obligation to transpose draft legislation, affect a certain level of process guarantees. An in-depth analysis of the minimum standards of the rights of suspects and defendants in criminal proceedings prompts reflection on the impact of the directives not implemented in the legal system on defining the rights of defense. The discussion on this subject will be presented in the context of the regulation contained in Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty.

Autonomie und Strafverteidigung zwischen Rechts- und Sozialstaatlichkeit

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Zink
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Legal Aid ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
The Past ◽  
Constant Change ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
German System ◽  
The Right

The Directive (EU) 2016/1919 on legal aid for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings and for requested persons in European arrest warrant proceedings affects the German system of mandatory defense in criminal proceedings. While the system of mandatory defense displays – in the majority view – the German understanding of “Rechtsstaatlichkeit” (rule of law), in the past, the whole system has also started to become subject to constant change, which the Legal Aid Directive enhances. From now on, accused persons must be given the right to justice access before being questioned by the police, thus the member states must guarantee the funding of the assistance of a lawyer in this early stage of the proceedings. Hence, the German organization of funding the assistance of a lawyer is subject of this principle-orientated investigation.

European Arrest Warrants and Minimum Standards for Trials in absentia – Blind Trust vs. Transnational Direct Effect?

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 275-287
Author(s):  
Martin Böse
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Minimum Standard ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Cross Border Cooperation ◽  
The Eu

The right of the accused person to be present at the trial and defend himself in person forms an essential part of the right to a fair trial. In this regard, the minimum standard enshrined in Art. 6 ECHR has been further developed by the minimum rules on procedural rights established by the EU legislator. According to a recent judgment of the Union’s Court of Justice, the Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant still allows the executing state to surrender a person convicted in absentia even if the EU minimum standard is not met. This paper will argue that common minimum standards have repercussions on cross-border cooperation based on mutual recognition and may emerge as a ground for refusal.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document