Search
Search Results
-
Specialities of public works in criminal law as a punishment
Views:151In Hungary there are two types of punishments: principal punishments and supplementary punishments. I examined the labour in the public interest, which is one of the principal punishments. Judges use this punishment barely than imprisonment, fine. Difficult to use this punishment, because it needs many preliminary works. I examined the labour in the public interest’s ruling from the 1950.:II. Criminal Code of General Part to nowadays.
In Hungary a person sentenced to labor in the public interest is obligated to perform the work defined for him in the court sentence. Only such work may be ordered as work in the public interest which the convict, in light of his health condition and education, is presumed to be capable of performing. There are many problems in rule of the labour in the public interest, for example one day of work in the public. As rule of the Criminal Code punishment shall be six hours of work, but other rule is, punishment shall be 4-8 hours of work for one day.
Other interesting rule is, the imprisonment substituting labour in the public interest or the remaining part thereof shall be established in such a way that one day of labour in the public interest shall correspond to one day of imprisonment. In my opinion it would be better, if the imprisonment substituting labour in the public interest or the remaining part thereof shall be established in fine.
On the other hand I suggested to use this punishment if a person younger than 18 years old. I think if a person is 16 years old, this punishment can be more effective than other punishments.
I found many differences, and many similarities between Hungarian and international Criminal Codes, Propositions, and finally I wrote some important, new point to change the rules.
-
Az előzetes letartóztatás néhány gyakorlati kérdése
1-16Views:152The pre-trial detention is the strictest coercive measures against a defendant in the criminal procedure. It is the most serious intervention to the private life before the final judgement. The decision of it is exclusively in the competence of courts.
There are several legal reasons to issue a preliminary warrant. The pre-trial detention of the defendant may take place in a proceeding related to a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment, and only under the following conditions.
a) the defendant has escaped, or has attempted to escape, or absconded from the court, the prosecutor or the investigating authority, or another procedure has been launched against the defendant for commiting a deliberate criminal offence also punishable by imprisonment,
b) owing to the risk o fan escape or hiding, or for other reasons, there is reasonable cause to beleive that the presence of the defendant in procedural actions cannot be otherwise ensured,
c) there is reasonable cause to beleive that if left at liberty, the defendant would frustrate, obstruct or jeopardise the evidentiary procedure, especially by means of influencing or intimidating the witnesses, or by the destruction, falsification or secretion of physical evidence or documents,
d) there is reasonable cause to believe thet if left at liberty, the defendant would accomplish the attempted or planned criminal offence or commit another criminal offence punishable by imprisonment.
If the conclusive decision does not become final at the time of its announcement, the court shall immediately make a decision on pre-trial detention. The pre-trial detention may also be ordered – in addition to the reasons stipulated in a), b) and d) – owing to the risk that the accused may escape or hide, taken the duration of the imprisonment imposed in the verdict.
The judge has to support his or her decision with batter of statistics to establish these reasons. This essay shows the necessery examination of the legal reasons.
-
- Alternatives to imprisonment in the light of sentencing
54-65.Views:267In most criminal cases, the judges and the society also think the same, imprisonment is the best option,because the criminal have to suffer. I think there can be a different way of thinking. There area lot of theretical and practical view,which we can choose from. In my study I want to take a step, to open well-known doors in this well-known question. In my study i want to figure it out, how to find the balance, between the expectation from the society, and special preventation. It is a really hard question, because it has not any golden rule. In every case we have to look for it. I choosed verdicts from last 5 years from hungarian courts, to figure out what was the reason behind the judgement. What was the key phrase, or factor, which convinced the judge to choose the alternative sanction. As is said , there is no golden rule, it is just some theoretical study. In the future i want to make a bigger step, to search the answer.
But in this study I have some little answers, which will help me to build up the in the future. I figured out, in the hungarian prison system there is one problem, which is recidivism. In the prison more than 50% of the detainees are repeat offender, or habitual criminal. I think That can be a warning sign about imprisonment. I think imprisonment is like penicilin in the 20th century. It has the purpose, and can be used in some cases, but not every time. The prisons are overpopulated, which hard for enforcement, and the criminals to. Lot of aggression and physical abuse can accumulate in one cell. I mention a case, which happened in a hungarian prison, where the offender have been killed by his cellmates, because he was weaker then them.
In my study I am trying to step forward to find the previously mentioned golden rule.
-
A büntetőjogi mediáció gyakorlati aspektusai
1-12Views:188Mediation is a conflict-management method designed to achieve restorative justice (offenders should assume responsibility and pay the penalty for their deeds, with the greatest emphasis on reparation of the victim, and the affronted community should be conciliated). This method may be applied to solving a variety of disputes or conflicts (e.g. disputes involving neighbours, families, couples, and companies).
The mediation technique has already been used in the fields of civil law, family law and employment law. From 2007 onwards, it can also be applied in criminal procedures. According to Article 221/A of the Code on Criminal Procedure (Act XIX of 1998) the mediation process may be used in criminal procedures dealing with certain offences against the person, property or traffic offences if the crime is punishable with no more than five years imprisonment, and the offender has made a confession during the criminal investigation. -
The Abolitionist Tendency in Hungary: the History of Capital Punishment between the Sixties and the Eighties
Views:171The capital punishment was poena ordinaria throughout the history of Hungary. Nevertheless, it was applied most frequently not in the Middle Ages, but in the 20th century. There have never been so many legal executions in our country, than during the World War One and Two, however in lack of reliable statistical data the precise number of the death penalties is not known even in recent years. There were numerous death penalties imposed in the Fifties as well, mainly in the years of retaliation after the Revolution of 1956. Only in 1961 did the situation get back to normal, when implementation of martial law stopped for good and all. In this year the Parliament of the People’s Republic of Hungary passed the Act V of 1961 on the Criminal Code that permitted the infliction of the death penalty for altogether thirty-one criminal offenses (for nine crimes against the state, two crimes against peace and humanity, eight military offenses and twelve common offenses), but this sanction in no cases was qualified as compulsory, the judge had the possibility to impose an imprisonment sentence for 10-15 years in each times. The Criminal Code’s Amendment, the Law Decree No. 28 of 1971 reduced the number of the crimes punishable by death to twenty-six, although a new capital felony, seizure of aircraft, was introduced as well. In 1978 a new Criminal Code, namely the Act IV of 1978, was drafted in which death was also ordered for twenty-six offenses, of them for a new one, Act of Terrorism. Meanwhile the number of the death penalties carried out persistently decreased (in the Sixties there were 129 executions, in the Seventies there were 47 and in the Nineties there were 32). However, the process of the abolition actually started only in 1983 when a conference was organized by the Hungarian Lawyers Alliance to discuss the future of the capital punishment in the Hungarian criminal law. Nevertheless, the Hungarian abolitionist movement gained strength in deed when the League Against Capital Punishment was formed in 1989. In the subsequent year the League asked the newly established Hungarian Constitutional Court to declare the death penalty unconstitutional on the ground that it was contrary to the right to life protected by Article 54 of the Hungarian Constitution. Eventually this happened in 1990 by Constitutional Court Decision No. 23-AB of 31 October 1990. From this time the practice of capital punishment is irrevocably forbidden in Hungary.
-
Jurisdictional Constants and Doubtful Questions in Recent Hungarian Jurisdiction of Damages for Non-Pecuniary Loss
Views:146Since 1992, date of Constitutional Court’s decision No. 34/1992, certain rules cannot be found in Hungarian Civil Code. There is only a part of a sentence that gives right to any injured person to claim damages in case of personal injuries. More than 10 years after the cassation we are able to look through the legal practice in connection with damages for non-pecuniary loss. The recent re-codifying process plans a brand new institution to substitute and follow damages for non pecuniary loss: pain award. To establish a decent regulation of pain award, jurisdiction of the last decade cannot be neglected. This essay aims to gather typical and crystallized methods of judgements in certain cases, which could be seen as essential and accepted unwritten rules of jurisdiction concerning this field of damages.
One of the most difficult problems to solve is the question of amount. This field of damages for non-pecuniary loss is always problematic, because all of the cases are different. Although there are similarities between cases if we examine just damages themselves, but due to the difference of human personality it is almost impossible to give exact phrases and rules to help our judges. We can say that highest amounts are generated by assaults against physical integrity and life. Examination during a legal procedure concentrates on the stress caused by the injury, number of injured rights, age of the injured person and the durability of the harm. If the injured person contributed to the injury, it generates reduced amount of damages.
Method of compensation is really simple for the first time. Hungarian legal system knows two different types for the method of damages: in kind or in money. Former one is inapplicable for non-pecuniary losses. If we compensate in money, there are two solutions: injured person can get the whole sum immediately or we can choose allowance as well. The adaptation of allowance is rather small in Hungary, in spite of the advantages this legal institution could offer. It does not mean res iudicata, so it is flexible and offers opportunity to adjust to changed circumstances in the future: both duration and amount of allowance could be changed.
It is an interesting question whether personal circumstances of the misdoer could be examined when calculating the amount of allowance. The answer is not unambiguous. Civil law focuses on compensation for the injured party, not the punishment of the misdoer. In spite of this essential lemma, it is necessary to take into account the solvency of the defendant, if we want the plaintiff to get the adjudged amount really.
Youth is not the only reason of allowance, sometimes old age could be a well-based legal ground for application of this method of compensation as well. It is really important to examine the personal circumstances of the injured party to choose between these two methods: which one serves the aim of compensation, moderation of lost joy of life the most.
Civil Code precludes the possibility to apply both methods together for the same plaintiff. In my opinion the solution of German Civil Code (BGB) should be considered. BGB allows both methods together. It means that possibilities could be wider and fit better to the actual case and its circumstances.
Although obligation of damages has two parties traditionally, in a legal procedure of damages for non-pecuniary loss this bipolar situation can be proven false. On the part of the misdoer it is an interesting question what kind of damages can be blamed the state. In Hungary we can meet rules order the responsibility of the state in the field of medical damages or damages for unlawful arrest and illegal imprisonment. Amounts of damages are the highest in these situations.
On the part of the injured person an often argued problem the position of secondary victims’ claims. These claims are always problematic, because personality rights belong closely to the person himself and there is no possibility to inherit them. Hungarian Civil Code admits compensation for relatives only in case of injuring reputation of a dead person. There are several decisions in which courts admit these claims on the ground of their sui generis base. It is a decent solution, but because of the uneven jurisdiction it needs codifying.
We can say that there are a lot of jurisdictional constants in Hungary in connection with damages for non-pecuniary loss. These are easy to collect and most of them are able to be codified in a strictly non-taxative style. But this examination showed that doubtful questions can also be found in Hungary especially the application of allowance, claims of secondary victims. To arrange these problems, starting point should be jurisdiction itself.
-
Presidential Pardon from the Aspect of Criminal Law
102-113Views:425The individual pardon, exercised by the President of the Republic, has recently become the centre of attention in the media and among the lawyers in context of life imprisonment without parole eligibility. This prompts me to investigate the presidential pardon in this article.
I am dealing with the origins and the standardization of pardon, then I move on to the conditions and criteria the Head of State can take into consideration when making the decision. Afterwards, I am presenting some statistics.
The power of pardon is stipulated by the Fundamental Law of Hungary, and the specific rules can be found in the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Act and the Punishment Executive Act.
I am focusing on the last one, in which the Government and the Parliament have redressed the problems of life sentence, regarding human rights, with a compulsory procedure of pardon, thus giving the convict the hope of being released from prison. However, this solution raises a few questions, so arguments can be made both for and against it.