A Review of the Criminal Procedure System and its Causes A Model Study on the Arab Countries

Reconsideration is one of the methods of extraordinary objection to the final judgments, i.e. those that have acquired the authority of the res judicata and become unobjectionable by appeal or cassation, and it is one of the regular means granted to litigants by virtue of which they can file a lawsuit for the damage they have suffered as a result of a judgment or decision. In their interest, and in this sense, it is a license granted by the system to the litigants to show the defects of the judgment issued in the case and to demand the competent judiciary to cancel it or amend it in a way that removes its defects. Some laws and regulations in Arab countries call it reconsideration, others petition, and the other retrial. With these different names, it became clear to the researcher, after studying these means, especially in the statutory reasons and justifications that their existence requires to object accordingly to reconsider a decision or a judicial ruling issued in the interest of the objector to obtain a decision or a judicial ruling in his favor, and he found that there is a problem in some of them, which It lies in the fact that only the litigants have the right to use it, so no objection is accepted from another person who is not a party to the lawsuit. Therefore, the researcher in this study will shed light on it through the use of the inductive and descriptive approach in order to show its importance in achieving judicial justice, which guarantees the litigants to resolve the dispute between them by reconsidering the final ruling, in order to arrive at a new ruling that expresses the desired truth, and he divided it into two sections, The first is a definition of the concept of reviewing the system of criminal procedures and its legal nature, and the second of the reasons for which litigants may request a review of the system of criminal procedures based on the final rulings and the legal nature of these reasons.

Sprawiedliwość w polskim dyskursie konstytucyjnym i jej konotacje społeczne

The analysis of the use of the notion of justice in the Polish Constitution proves that in the course of historical development, the designated value was given various conceptual profiles. It was associated mostly with the law within the subjective (‘justified entitlement’) and objective scope (‘legitimacy’), with the judicial authorities (‘fair hearing’), and with the punishment (‘just decision’). Apart from juridical meaning, the notion of justice shall connote ‘equality’ or ‘equal treatment of all people’, including ‘equal justice under law’ or ‘objectivity of a judicial ruling’. Over time the justice gains social and political value which is reflected in the ideal of social justice meant as ‘the equality of all citizens and equal evaluation thereof’. The latter is highlighted in the Polish Constitution (of 1997) where justice is treated as the guiding moral and constitutional principle in the Republic of Poland. The significant profiles of names designating justice in the texts of the Constitution are confronted with the connotations appearing in the questionnaires filled up by the students of the universities in Białystok. In the eyes of young Poles, justice seems to be a human value which is important in their environment an shall be protected by the state.

El derecho de las personas con discapacidad a gozar del más alto nivel de salud posible

El fallo judicial de análisis versa sobre el reconocimiento del derecho subjetivo de una persona adulta mayor que padece de hipoacusia bilateral profunda, a gozar del más alto nivel posible de salud. En ese contexto, se considera el alcance que debe tener el derecho a la salud de las personas con discapacidad, sobre todo en términos de accesibilidad, y el rol que cumple el Estado como garante del mismo. The judicial ruling of analysis deals with the recognition of the subjective right of an elderly person suffering from profound bilateral hearing loss to enjoy the highest possible level of health. In this context, the scope of the right to health of people with disabilities, especially in terms of accessibility, and the role of the State as guarantor of it must be considered.

The Jurisprudential Maxim (Translator’s Statement is Absolutely Accepted) Between Islamic Law and Civil Procedures Law in the Sultanate of Oman And Contemporary Applications: القاعدة الفقهية: (يُقبل قول المترجم مطلقا) دراسة مقارنة بين الفقه الإسلامي وقانون الإجراءات المدنية والتجارية في سلطنة عمان

This research aims at clarifying the significance of and studying and establishing the jurisprudential maxims, especially those related to the judiciary so that they help judges in their work, muftis in their understanding and students in their memorization. The maxim of (Translator’s Statement is Absolutely Accepted) is a great maxim since it represents a principle in the judicial ruling. This research is a new addition to the comparative jurisprudential literature, an approach between Islamic jurisprudence and contemporary law, and a manifestation of the greatness of Islamic Sharia that cares for all aspects of life. This research is divided into two subjects: First: the definition of terms such as maxim, jurisprudence and law in three sections. Second: the explanation and establishment of the maxim and the legal status in four sections, as well as the judicial applications. The researcher concludes the study with the most important results, that of the jurisprudential maxims combine different issues in simple eloquent phrases, and that the procedures law has noble Sharia purposes, represented in caring for the interests of people and achieving the highest meanings of integrity and justice. The Islamic jurisprudence pays attention to the maxims of the rules of procedures more than the positive laws do. The law considers the Islamic Jurisprudence regarding the translator issue, unless in oath-taking. Translators shall be fair, familiar with both languages, and accepts a single statement. Among the most important recommendations: the provisions of jurisprudential maxims shall be contained in bills, and the judges shall consider the maxim in all filed cases. In addition, education courses should be held for translators so that they know the procedures of the progress of cases in courts, and the criticality of accuracy.

Letter of Censure to the Jurists who Issued the Latest Judgement on Apostasy

On 26 May 2012, Kadivar in his colleagues published an open letter to six Shi’ite authorities criticizing their Judgements (fatwa) on Apostasy of an Iranian singer. The main subjects of this letter are: Instead of Targeting the Effect, Target the Cause, Two Strands of Extremism, The Compassionate Islam, The Distinction between Critique and Insult, Rejection of the Fatwa on Executing an Apostate and Blasphemer, Resorting to Qur’anic and Hadith Standards when Confronted with Nonsensical and Absurd Talk, and Unwholesome Fallout from the Judgement to Assassinate. Condemning to death an accused apostate or blasphemer is void of any reliable religious evidence from the Qur’an, Sunna, consensus and reason. Rather, it is contrary to the Qur’an and reason. Moreover, due to the many perversions resulting from this decree, it would certainly be a cause of weakening and impairing Islam. Only a competent court is entitled to issue such a judicial ruling, and its implementation is restricted to court functionaries alone. The decree of a qualified jurist alone does not suffice. Killing an apostate or blasphemer of the Prophet is absolutely void of any reliable Qur’anic proof.

Issuing a Ruling on the Death Penalty by a Process that Falls Outside the Sphere of a Competent Court, and Subsequently Bestowing upon the General Public a Mandate to Implement it, will Engender Lawlessness and Anarchy

This chapter is the first section of Kadivar’s ‘Treatise on Refuting the Punishment for Blasphemy and Apostasy’. In this section, the author’s aim is to respond to two questions: (1) can one issue judgements on blasphemy and apostasy outside the orbit of a competent court? and (2) can one delegate the responsibility for carrying out the punishment that is, in principle, the mandate of judicial functionaries, to “anyone who has access to the convicted”? One who replies “Yes, it is” to both of these questions is actually issuing a fatwa in favour of anarchy and disorder, which is certainly not the Lawgiver’s intent. After the introduction of the treatise, this section is divided into four subsections: Under which Jurist’s Jurisdiction is a Judicial Ruling Issued? Issuing a Judicial Order is the Exclusive Mandate of a Competent Court, Disorder Resulting from Allowing the General Public to Carry Out the Death Sentence, and Human Rights are not in Conflict with Islam.

Rights, Wrongs, and Injustices

Rights, Wrongs, and Injustices is the first comprehensive account of remedial law’s scope, foundations, and structure. A remedy, it argues, is a judicial ruling, and remedial law is the body of rules governing the availability and content of remedies. Focusing on rulings that are intended to resolve private law disputes (e.g. awards of damages, injunctions, and restitutionary orders), this book explains why remedial law is distinctive, how it relates to substantive law, and what its foundational principles are. Drawing on doctrinal, historical, and philosophical sources, it advances four main arguments. First, the question of what courts should do when individuals seek their assistance (the focus of remedial law) is different from the question of how individuals should treat one another in their day-to-day lives (the focus of substantive law). Second, remedies provide distinctive reasons to perform the actions they command; in particular, they provide reasons different from those provided by either rules or sanctions. Third, remedial law has a complex relationship to substantive law. Some remedies are responses to rights-threats, others to wrongs, and yet others to injustices. Further, remedies respond to these events in different ways: while some remedies replicate substantive duties, others modify duties or create entirely new duties. Finally, remedial law is underpinned by general principles—principles that cut across the traditional distinctions between so-called ‘legal’ and ‘equitable’ remedies. Together, these arguments provide the foundation for an understanding of remedial law that takes the concept of a remedy seriously, classifies remedies according to their grounds and content, illuminates the relationship between remedies and substantive rights, and explains remedial law in terms of general principles, not historical categories.

Amparo y medicamentos en faz de experimentación médica / “Amparo” and drugs in medical experimentation

En el presente trabajo se comenta un fallo judicial en el cual se analiza la procedencia de una acción constitucional de amparo iniciada por el progenitor de un niño de tres años de edad -enfermo de cáncer- a fin de que la obra social de la provincia de Entre Ríos y/o el propio estado provincial proveyese al menor el medicamento necesario para la continuación de su tratamiento, fármaco este que sólo se expende en Alemania. The present paper comments on a judicial ruling that analyzes the requirements of a constitutional action initiated by the father of a three-year-old child with cancer in order to receive, from the medical care system of Entre Ríos Province and/or the state itself, the necessary medication for the continuation of the child’s treatment, a drug that is only sold in Germany.

Gene Editing in Aotearoa – Legal Considerations for Policy Makers

Gene editing use in pest control, primary industries and human health care pose significant new challenges for regulation. Under current New Zealand legislation (the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996) and a judicial ruling on interpretation of the legislation and regulations, the status of gene edited organisms in New Zealand are considered genetically modified and are regulated as new organisms employing a precautionary approach. This article has identified some of the complexities of the legislation inherent in regulating a rapidly developing technology, where such advances may be well ahead of current frameworks and public acceptance. Legal and policy issues have been considered. A future-proof framework to keep abreast rapidly advancing biotechnologies is required whereby new legislation for biotechnologies is developed and a single-entry point for biotechnology applications is implemented. Most importantly this article recommends valuing Treaty of Waitangi principles and have those principles lead us in all that we do.