Without abstract

Im vergangenen Jahr wurden die Gerichte wegen der Langsamkeit der Rechtssprechung, des Fehlens der Einheitlichkeit des Rechtes und auch wegen der Juristerei mit Selbstzweck oft kritisiert. Der Meinung des selbs als Richter taetigen Verfassers nach ist keine von diesen eine unbegründete Kriktik. Der Ansicht des Verfassers nach blieben aber die Prüfung der Zusammenhaenge der kritiesierten Probleme durch die Kritiker gewöhnlich weg. Der Vefasser betont von diesen die Wichtigkeit der Reglung des Strafprozesses, da seiner Meinung nach das Auftreten der kritisierten Probleme auch auf dessen Fehler zurückzuführen ist.

Hierfür stellt der Ansicht des Verfassers nach die gültige Regelung des Strafprozessgesetzes zu der Subsidiaranklage ein gutes Beispiel dar. Dementsprechend stellt die Dissertation ein alternatives Modell des Subsidiaranklageverfahrens mit texttreuer Ausführlichkeit vor. Die von dem Verfasser empfohlene Regelung folgt neben einigen grundlegenden Aenderungen der vom Gesetzgeber angewandten Technik zur Kodifizierung. In diesem Zusammenhang gibt der Verfasser die Definition des Opfers neu an, das eine der Grundfragen der zwecksmaessigen Anwendung des Rechsintituts verkörpert, darauf aufbauend macht er auch eine Empfehlung zur Definition des Subsidiaranklaegers. Dabei stellt die inhaltliche Neuheit der Empfehlung die leicht überschaubare Regelung und die einheitliche Auffassung des Verfahrens, sowie die Unterbringung der Regelung des Verfahrens vor dem Gericht im Rahmen eines Spezialverfahrens dar: all das würde auch die bedeutende Abnahme der betroffenen Gesetzestexte nach sich ziehen.

Auf diese Weise macht der Verfasser darauf aufmerksam, dass über die Rechtskenntnis des Richters hinaus auch das Ansehen des Gesetzes ein unabdingbarer Faktor für das optimale Funktionieren der Rechtssprechung ist und all dass kann sich nur aus der fachgemaessen Anwendung der Rechtsgestaltung und der Rechtssprechung entfalten. Deshalb weist der Verfasser als Beendigung seiner kurzen Dissertation auf die Wichtigkeit der seiner Meinung nach fehlerhaften Annaeherung an das als ein Dilemma aufgetauchten Frage der Rechtsprechung oder der Gerechtigkeitssprechung hin.

The rules of Hungarian Criminal Procedure Code related to summary proceedings aren’t newfangled. Probably, due to the criminal policy needs, arise from that, recent years these changed considerably and in a sense went through “volte-face”. To emphasise the strong connection between this special process and the investigation, I review the rules of some surrounding states that apply to this, in order to point out in a constructive way the problems of the operative Hungarian regulations. I’d like not only to line up these for the Reader but – in search of optimal key – also make de lege feranda proposals.

Absztrakt nélkül

This is an essay about the connection of impressionability and intelligence quotient. The intelligence quotient of witness or accused has main role in the criminal procedure.

So, what is the intelligence and the intelligence quotient? The intelligence is a mental power, that contains the quality of argumentation, contemplation, learning, problem solution and the abstract thinking. This mental power helps to understand the happenings in the world. The intelligence quotient of the witness or accused is very important, because the quality of perception is based on the intelligence quotient. The perception shows how they can remember the criminal situations. The intelligence quotient depedns on the the social and cultural enviornment, the inherited qualities, and the personal experiences.

The important question is, which is the stronger, the intelligence or the impressionability. High intelligence quotient is a mean of the witness or accused to escape form impressionability. On the other hand, the authorities try to use the power of influence. So two powers meet in the criminal procedure, the intelligence and the influenceing, and usually the stronger is the winner.

The intelligence quotient has main role in the part of the investigation and the trial. The warnings before the interrogation are written in the difficult language of law. So it would be a problem in the part of investigation, because the witness or accused does not understand these. Because of that they would say or tell something that they would not tell in normal circumstances. The low intelligence makes the accused confess their real or believed sin. The accused with higher intelligence quotient understands much better the warning, and they can use those possibilites the law premits them. Their combinative quality is higher, so they discover another solutions not just the confessing. The authorities shall pay attention to the intelligence quotient of the accused, because the extremly low intelligence quotient would be the sign of mental retardation. The mental retardation is a kind of pathological mental state. The accused who suffers in pathological mental state is not be punishable or his or her punishment may be reduced unlimited.

The language of trials is also difficult and the other problem with it is publicity. The accused with low IQ feels shame because of their low IQ so they want to keep it secret. The accused becomes stressed in the trial so they lose their second chance to make things better, because they are not able to confess without impressions again. Low intelligence quotient usually cooperates with low ability of problem solution, so the accused with low intelligence can’t adapt themselves to the occassion of the trial. This circumstance would influence the judges, when they impose punishment, so the punishment would be stricter.

The conclusion is that the accused with low intelligence quotient meets with some difficulties during the criminal procedure, so the consuels for the defence shall pay attention to them, and help their clients with comments of the legal texts. On the other hand, the authorities shall be out for the good knowledge of mankind.

In the past years the European Union has been walking – with its directives, like the 2005/29/EC Directive on consumer rights and the 2008/48/EC Directive on credit agreements for consumers - on a new way, on which it doesn’t let the Member States to regulate (widely). So, minimum clauses are no longer used and the aim is the total harmonization.

The perfect example for this procedure is the Directive on consumer rights, which was published in the end of 2011 in the Official Journal of the European Union.

The aim of this paper is to introduce the new directive, but from the rules there will be only the demonstration of the rules which are in connection with the unfair commercial practices.

Without abstract

Without abstract

Without abstract

The aim of the study is to present the creation, development and forms of manifestation of the stereotype, furthermore, to represent how the certain created stereotypes influence the public thinking. The main trend of these ideas is to review whether the different stereotypical assumptions are shown in the course of demonstration and if yes, how they are emphatic. In addition to this I attempt to show how the generalizations gain ground in the criminal proceedings, especially in the demonstration. Prejudice will be examined from the aspect how the way of thinking of the adult population is pervaded by discrimination in Hungary today. My aim is to present how much the generalizations gain ground in the criminal proceedings, within this in the demonstration. In course of information and data collection I was led to the conclusion that in these days the stereotypes play very important role. In the course of my observations it became clearer and clearer to me that numerous stereotypes come round us. We think about different groups of people, things, situations, concepts in stereotypes. The range of stereotypes is quite wide. Stereotypes always have been and will be in human culture. We need them since they help to orientate in the world around us but they can be dangerous as well, since they can affect the minorities, genders and different groups of people disadvantageously.

As I have already mentioned, the main trend is to reveal the criminal projection of prejudice. We have to deal with the stereotypes, we have to know them in order to be able to handle them. I am convinced that some kinds of stereotypes live in everyone, we think in stereotypes many times, even when we do not notice them. If the stereotypes extremely consolidate, stiffen, they can easily become prejudices hurting others. Prejudiced way of thinking hides very much danger, it is important to be aware of the prejudices existing in us and to try to get them over. From the point of view of the topic discrimination can realize in the course of arrest, demonstration, formal accusation and rendition of the judgement.

Without abstract

Without abstract