Keresés
Keresési eredmények
-
Egy „jogfosztás” margójára
22-27Megtekintések száma:52Under the topic of long-term criminal processes the study focuses on the role of the defenders, regarding the delays, in connection with Section 275 and 281 of the Criminal Process Code (Act XIX of 1998), amended by the Act CLXXXIII of 2010.Due to the authors, the misuse of the principle „right of defense”, is one of the significant reasons of the delays in criminal processes. Therefore they agree with the modifications, came into force as of March 1, 2011, which made more difficult to misuse the above mentioned principle. According to the modifications, now it is prohibited to postpone the hearing at the court because, no matter why, the defender could not take part at it.
However, beside the positive evaluation of these modifications, the authors draw the attention of the legislator to the problems arising in the practice when the new rules will be applied. They highlight that the Subsection 3, Section 282 of the Criminal Process Code should have been modified, as well, and further amendments would also be necessary.
It is said that the modifications, either already in force or still to be drafted, are of a high importance, beacause on one hand they warrant that the right of defense would not be misused from this point of view any more, and on the other hand they also support to maintain and ensure the fair criminal process and the attorneys’ respect, further on.
-
A legalitás és az opportunitás kérdésének dilemmája a pótmagánvád tükrében
1-8Megtekintések száma:60The study is focusing on the principles of legality and opportunity regarding the so called substitute private prosecution and sets them against each other. In the study it is revealed that in case analyzing the growing importance of opportunity, under the Hungarian criminal process system – that is based on the principle of legality – there is a logical way to state that the two principles prevail rather together than against each other. The authors take a closer look on the rules of the current criminal process code, arising from the principle of opportunity and suggest a possible solution on the dogmatic problem how these two principles can exist at the same time in the substitute private prosecution.Based on rationalism, on the recommendation No. Rec(2000)19 of the Council of Europe and so that no conflicts arise from the provisions foreseen in the Framework Decision No. 2001/220/IB of the European Council, the study makes a suggestion to allow the victim to act as a substitute private prosecutor in case of authorities partially deny the investigation. However the authors’ suggestion is just the opposite (i.e. restriction) in case of authorities partially deny indictment. According to their suggestion the above mentioned allowance shall based always on reasonable and respectable circumtances and it shall be declared by the victim why the process at the court has to take place even if authorities were not of this opinion.
When the authors are analyzing the problems caused by the principle of opportunity and legality, and when they make suggestions that the rules regarding the substitute private prosecution shall be modified, they try to draw attention on the importance of this process as a significant right of victims regarding access to justice. The authors are on the opinion that the legislator shall pay not just a marginal attention on the problem when the victims are entitled to act as an substitute private prosecutor.