scholarly journals Prohibition of interrogation of notaries as witnesses in criminal proceedings

1970 ◽  
pp. 345-349
Author(s):  
Ulyana Polyak
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Notary Public ◽  
Made In

The current criminal procedure law of Ukraine stipulates that a witness is obliged to give a true testimony during pre-trial investigation and trial, however, the legislator made an exception for this by specifying the categories of persons who have been granted immunity from immunity, ie they are released by law. testify. The article deals with the problems of law and practice regarding the prohibition of the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings and the release of him from the obligation to keep the notarial secret by the person who entrusted him with the information which is the subject of this secret. The notion of notarial secrecy is proposed to be changed, since the subject of this secrecy is not only information that became known to the notary public from the interested person, but also those information that the notary received from other sources in the performance of their professional duties, as well as the procedural activity of the notary himself, is aimed at achieving a certain legal result. The proposal made in the legal literature to supplement the CPC of Ukraine with the provisions that a notary is subject to interrogation as a witness on information that constitutes a notarial secret, if the notarial acts were declared illegal in accordance with the procedure established by law The proposal to increase the list of persons who are not subject to interrogation as witnesses about the information constituting a notarial secret is substantiated, this clause is proposed to be supplemented by provisions that, apart from the notary, are not notarized, other notarials, notaries as well as the persons mentioned in Part 3 of Art. 8 of the Law of Ukraine "On Notary". Amendments to the current CPC of Ukraine by the amendments proposed in this publication will significantly improve the law prohibiting the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings, as well as improve certain theoretical provisions of the institute of witness immunity in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW-MAKING IN THE MODERN CONTEXT

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 67-71
Author(s):  
V. O. Belonosov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Modern Context ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Legal Understanding

The article analyzes the changes made to the CPC in 2019 and the first half of 2020. It is concluded that despite a significant reduction in overactive legislative drafting since 2019, the quality of the changes made leaves much to be desired. Unjustified repetition of general provisions without any novelty continues to occur. Substantive issues are the subject of regulation, while the subjects are persons who do not perform procedural functions. The amendments ignored citizens' rights and freedoms, were adopted in the interests of law enforcement agencies and were formal and bureaucratic in nature. All this does not contribute to the stability of legislation and respect for the law, distorting the meaning of legality. Under these conditions, it is proposed to return to a legal understanding of the law, to revive moral and ethical principles of criminal procedure, to resume and intensify discussions on the protection of individual rights and freedoms in criminal proceedings.

CONCEPT AND CONTENT OF A RECONCILIATION AGREEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariia Sirotkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Main Attention ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

The article is turned out to a scientific search for the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or accused" through the study of the essence of reconciliation and role in criminal proceedings thereof. The author notes that criminal procedural law (until 2012) had been proclaimed another approach to reconciliation between victim and suspect, not involved a dispute procedure as a conflict, the result of which can be reached by compromise and understanding through reconciliation. It is stated that one of the ways to resolve the legal conflict in committing a criminal offense was the opportunity to reach a compromise between the victim and the suspect (the accused) by concluding a reconciliation agreement between them, provided by the Code of Сriminal Procedure of Ukraine (2012). The main attention is placed on the shortcoming of the domestic criminal procedure law which is the lack of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or the accused", which can be eliminated only through examining the essence or legal nature of reconciliation in criminal proceedings. Taking into consideration the current legislation and modern views on the institution of reconciliation in criminal proceedings, the author's definition of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement" is proposed. Thus, “The conciliation agreement is an agreement in criminal proceedings concluded between the victim and the suspect or the accused person on their own initiative in relation to crimes of minor or medium gravity and in criminal proceedings in the form of private prosecution, the subject of which is the compensation of harm caused by wrongdoing or committing other actions not related to compensation for the damage that the suspect or the accused is obliged to commit in favor of the victim, in exchange for an agreed punishment and sentencing thereof or sentencing thereof and relief from serving a sentence with probation, as well as the statutory consequences of conclusion and approval of the agreement".

scholarly journals USE OF SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE DURING THE EXAMINATION OF THE SCENE OF A CRIME IN THE ORDER OF PART 3 ART. 214 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF UKRAINE

2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-160
Author(s):  
Andrіy Shulha ◽  
◽  
Tetyana Khailova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Knowledge And Skills ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Law

The article deals with the problem of specialist’s participation in the scene examination, which is carried out before entering information into the Unified Register of the pre-trial investigations. The essence of the problem is that the current criminal procedural law of Ukraine recognizes the specialist’s participation only in the pre-trial investigation, the litigation and the proceedings in the case of the commission of an unlawful act under the law of Ukraine on criminal liability. Part 1 of Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine states that a specialist in criminal proceedings is a person who has special knowledge and skills and can provide advice and conclusions during the pre-trial investigation and trial on issues that require appropriate special knowledge and skills. In other cases, the specialist has no procedural status. In addition, Part 1 of Article 237 of the CPC of Ukraine «Examination» states that the examination is conducted to identify and record information on the circumstances of the offense commitment. It is an act provided by the law of Ukraine on criminal liability. However, there are the cases in the investigation, when a report is received, for example, about a person's death, other events with formal signs of the offense, which must first be checked for signs of a crime, and only then the act can be considered as offense. In this case, a specialist takes part in the scene examination. However, the current criminal procedure law in accordance with Part 1, Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine determines the legal status of a specialist only as the participant in criminal proceedings. The paragraph 10, part 1 of Article 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine defines the criminal proceedings as pre-trial investigation and court proceedings or procedural actions in the case of the commission of an unlawful act. Therefore, when the inspection of the scene is based on the uncertain status of the event (there is no clear information that the event contains signs of an offense), the specialist’s participation is not regulated by law. The authors propose to consider the specialists as «experienced persons» in cases mentioned above and to include their advices to the protocol of the scene examination, as the advices of other scene examination participants.

scholarly journals PERANAN ALAT BUKTI DALAM PERKARA PIDANA DALAM PUTUSAN HAKIM MENURUT KUHAP

Yuridika ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Bastianto Nugroho
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Examination Process

The trial of a criminal case is to find out whether a criminal offense has occurred in an event, therefore in the most important criminal proceedings the proceedings are proved. Evidence is a problem that plays a role in the examination process in court because with this proof is determined the fate of a defendant. The legal function in the State of Indonesia is to regulate the order of society in the life of the nation and the state, whereas the violation of the law itself is an event that must exist in every society and is impossible to be eliminated absolutely, because violation of law is an integral part of development More complex. One of the provisions governing how the law enforcement officers carry out the task in the field of repressive is the criminal procedure law which has the purpose of searching and approaching material truth, the complete truth of a criminal case by applying the provisions of criminal procedure law honestly darn precisely with The purpose of finding out who the perpetrator can be charged with is a violation of the law. 

scholarly journals Kriminālprocesuāla, civilprocesuāla vai administratīvi procesuāla konfiskācija

2021 ◽  
pp. 568-575
Author(s):  
Gunārs Kūtris ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Important Challenge ◽  
The Law

The confiscation or forfeiture of crime proceeds is an important challenge in the fight against crime in every country. The Latvian Criminal Procedure Law (2005) provides ability of confiscating criminally acquired property before the sentencing of the guilty person, as well as the ability to apply extended confiscation for a convicted person. However, in recent years, practices and amendments to the law show trends that raise doubts about respect for human rights and principles of criminal proceedings in confiscation processes. The article deals with other countries’ experience in the confiscation of property of uncertain origin in various processes – administrative, civil and criminal proceedings. The summary gives the author’s conclusions on the legally correct confiscation process.

scholarly journals Criminal procedure principles in defendant hearing

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-81
Author(s):  
Željko Mirkov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Crucial Issue ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Party Control ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Uniform Definition ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Principle Of Legality

Although there is no uniform definition of procedural principles in criminal procedure theory, they can be defined as legal rules or guidelines on which the criminal proceedings are based. As such, the principles of criminal procedure law apply to procedural entities and procedural actions. Evidentiary actions, as a type of procedural action, clarify the criminal case that is the subject of the criminal proceedings. The Criminal Procedure Code stipulates several evidentiary actions, one of which is the preliminary hearing of the defendant. The defendant hearing, in which the defendant gives their testimony, is given a great deal of attention because it represents one of the most important pieces of evidence, and the course of evidence presentation is the most significant and crucial issue of the criminal proceedings. Therefore, the paper will present a review of the criminal procedure principles related to this evidentiary action, starting from the principle of legality as the main principle, followed by the principles of orality, publicity, immediacy and adversity (party control of facts and means of proof).

scholarly journals Issues in separation of criminal procedural functions

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 01010 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Kaija
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Insight Into

The term ‘criminal procedural function’. has historically been used by scientists. In order to identify primary issues in procedural functions, the competition principle was analyzed. This strengthened such important issues as separation of prosecution and court functions, parties’ equality, independence of courts etc. Therefore, the concept of three concept functions – prosecution, defence and adjudication - was developed in criminal proceedings. In the context of the Criminal Procedure Law having taking effect, this term was included into the law, including the principle of separation of criminal procedural functions. The aim of this paper is to offer the insight into interpretation of the concept of the criminal procedural function with the special focus on specific issues in function separation. Section 17 of Criminal Procedure Law determines the function of control of restrictions of human rights in a pre-trail. The functions of prosecution, defence and adjudication do not determine their priority over all other criminal procedural functions. These functions are claimed to be separate and therefore cannot be applied to the same person. This paper examines the equivalence of procedural functions as one of the most fair of the court elements. In the end, key conclusions are summarized.

Criminal procedure powers of the head of the institution of the penal correction system as a subject of inquiry: implementation problems

2020 ◽  
pp. 144-149
Author(s):  
Андрей Станиславович Александров
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Correctional Institution ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Detention Center ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Implementation Problems ◽  
Correction System

В статье рассматриваются особенности уголовно-процессуального статуса учреждений и органов уголовно-исполнительной системы. Поднимаются вопросы об уголовно-процессуальных компетенциях начальника исправительного учреждения и следственного изолятора в качестве органа дознания. Автором обозначена проблема размытости правового статуса начальника исправительного учреждения в действующем уголовно-процессуальном законодательстве. Отмечены особенности осуществления дознания в целом и дознания в условиях исправительных учреждений в частности. Обозначены противоречия в правоприменительной практике органов прокуратуры и положений уголовно-процессуального закона. В статье рассмотрены различные позиции ученых относительно компетенций начальников исправительных учреждений в производстве неотложных следственных действий. Рассмотрена отдельная практика усиления прокурорского надзора за уголовно-процессуальной деятельностью учреждений и органов УИС исходя из требований ст. 5, 40, 150, 157 УПК РФ. Затронут на сегодня спорный вопрос о способности или неспособности начальника исправительного учреждения возбудить уголовное дело или вынести отказной материал. Делается акцент на недопустимости неоднозначного понимания со стороны правоприменителя норм уголовно-процессуального законодательства. The article discusses the features of the criminal procedural status of institutions and bodies of the penal correction system. Questions are raised about the criminal procedural competencies of the head of the correctional institution and the pre-trial detention center as the subject of inquiry. The author outlines the problem of blurring the legal status of the head of the correctional institution in the current criminal procedure legislation. Peculiarities of the implementation of the inquiry in general and of inquiry in the conditions of correctional institutions in particular are noted. The contradictions in the law enforcement practice of the prosecution authorities and the provisions of the criminal procedure law are indicated. The article discusses the various positions of scientists regarding the competencies of the heads of correctional institutions in the production of urgent investigative actions. A separate practice of strengthening prosecutorial supervision of the criminal procedure activities of the institutions and bodies of the penal correction system based on the requirements of Art. 5, 40, 150, 157 Code of Criminal Procedure. Today, the controversial issue of the ability or inability to initiate a criminal case or to bring out refusal material by the head of the correctional institution will be raised. The emphasis is on the inadmissibility of the ambiguity of understanding by the law enforcer of the norms of criminal procedure legislation.

CURRENT ISSUES OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MINORS IN THE CONTEXT OF MODERN REALITY

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-164
Author(s):  
Svetlana V. Verkhoturova ◽  
Oksana V. Pavlenko
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Made In

This article examines the current theoretical and practical issues of criminal proceedings against minors in the light of recent changes in the criminal procedure legislation. The research was conducted using formal-logical and dialectic methods, as well as the comparative-legal method when analyzing criminal and legal proceedings against minors. The authors conclude that a number of existing criminal procedure norms regulating the preliminary investigation and consideration of criminal cases in court against minors do not meet international standards and require further improvement. This article draws attention to the procedural errors of investigators (inquirers) and judges that are allowed in the process of investigation and consideration of criminal cases in court in relation to minor suspects, accused persons, defendants. The lack of sufficient legal regulation in the criminal procedure law is called the main reason for the mistakes made in the criminal proceedings against minors. In order to solve the identified problems, the authors propose to make appropriate additions to the current criminal procedure law.

scholarly journals Kedudukan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 Dalam Mengatasi Kendala Penanggulangan Tindak Pidana Korporasi (The Role Of Regulation Of The Supreme Court Number 13 Year 2016 In Overcoming Obstacles Of Corporate Criminal Infringement)

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Budi Suhariyanto
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Corporate Crime ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Corruption Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject

The prevention of corporate crime in Indonesia is constrained due to unclear management of corporate crime. In order to overcome the imperfection of such arrangements, the Supreme Court issued Supreme Court Regulation No.13 of 2016 on the Procedures for Corruption Case Handling by Corporations. There are questions that arise, what are the obstacles faced by Law Enforcement in an effort to overcome corporate crime and how the role of Perma No. 13 of 2016 in overcoming the obstacles to overcome the criminal act of the corporation? Normative legal research method is used to answer the problem. Normatively, from various laws governing the corruption of the subject of crime, there is no detailed formulation of corporate handling procedures so that law enforcers experience difficulties in conducting the criminal proceedings against the corporation. Article 79 of the Law on the Supreme Court provides the legal basis that if there is a legal deficiency in the course of the judiciary in any case, the Supreme Court has the authority to enact legislation to fill such shortcomings or vacancies. Perma No.13 of 2016 can be used as a guide for Law Enforcement to overcome technical obstacles of corporation criminal procedure law. Nevertheless, Perma has limitation so that required update of corporation criminal procedure in RKUHAP. AbstrakPenanggulangan tindak pidana korporasi di Indonesia mengalami kendala akibat tidak jelasnya pengaturan penanganan tindak pidana korporasi. Dalam rangka mengatasi ketidaksempurnaan pengaturan tersebut, Mahkamah Agung menerbitkan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung No.13 Tahun 2016 tentang Tata Cara Penanganan Perkara Tindak Pidana Oleh Korporasi. Ada pertanyaan yang mengemuka yaitu apa saja kendala yang dihadapi Penegak Hukum dalam upaya menanggulangi tindak pidana korporasi dan bagaimana peran Perma Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 dalam mengatasi kendala penanggulangan tindak pidana korporasi tersebut? Metode penelitian hukum normatif digunakan untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut. Secara normatif, dari berbagai peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur korporasi subjek tindak pidana, tidak dirumuskan detail tata cara penanganan korporasi sehingga penegak hukum mengalami kendala dalam melakukan proses pemidanaan terhadap korporasi. Pasal 79 Undang-Undang tentang Mahkamah Agung memberikan dasar hukum bahwa apabila dalam jalannya peradilan terdapat kekurangan atau kekosongan hukum dalam suatu hal, Mahkamah Agung memiliki wewenang membuat peraturan untuk mengisi kekurangan atau kekosongan tersebut. Perma No. 13 Tahun 2016 dapat dijadikan pedoman bagi Penegak Hukum untuk mengatasi kendala teknis hukum acara pidana korporasi. Namun, Perma tersebut memiliki keterbatasan sehingga diperlukan pembaruan hukum acara pidana korporasi dalam RKUHAP.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document