Search
Search Results
-
Az európai nyomozási határozat, mint a büntetőeljárás hatékonyságát fokozó eszköz
26-49Views:321A büntetőügyekben folytatott igazságügyi együttműködés egyik célkitűzése egy olyan eljárási rendszer kidolgozása, amely elősegíti a tagállami büntetőeljárások hatékonyságát, így lehetőséget teremt arra, hogy az egyik tagállamban beszerzett bizonyítási eszköz egy másik tagállamban folytatott büntetőeljárás keretében is könnyedén felhasználható legyen. Az Amszterdami Szerződés hatályba lépésétől kezdődően több olyan dokumentum is született, amelyik egy ilyen rendszer megteremtésének szükségességére hívta fel a figyelmet. Az Európai Bizottság (a továbbiakban: Bizottság) 2009-ben kiadott, a büntetőügyekben felvett bizonyítékoknak a tagállamok által másik tagállamtól történő megszerzéséről és elfogadhatóságuk biztosításáról szóló Zöld könyvében számba vette azokat a hatályos jogintézményeket, amelyek „mechanizmusokat biztosítanak a tagállamok számára ahhoz, hogy a határokon átnyúló helyzetekben elfogadható büntetőügyi bizonyítékokat gyűjtsenek,” s megállapította, hogy a bizonyításfelvételt érintő uniós joganyag alapvetően két csoportra osztható. Vannak egyrészt olyan jogintézmények, amelyek kölcsönös jogsegélyre (pl.: kölcsönös bűnügyi jogsegélyről szóló európai egyezmény), másrészt pedig olyanok, amelyek a kölcsönös elismerés elvére épülnek (pl.: európai bizonyításfelvételi parancs). Valójában egyik sem teremti meg azt a mechanizmust, amellyel biztosított lenne a hatékony bizonyításfelvétel egy másik tagállamban, vagy a megszerzett bizonyítási eszközök tényleges felhasználhatósága/elfogadhatósága. E hiányosság kiküszöbölését hivatott szolgálni a 2014. április 3-án elfogadott európai nyomozási határozatról szóló irányelv. Célkitűzése – a büntetőeljárások hatékonyságának a fokozása érdekében – a bizonyításfelvétel és a bizonyítékátadás egységes, a kölcsönös elismerés elvén alapuló rendszerének megteremtése, amely a bizonyítékok minden fajtájára kiterjed, pontos végrehajtási határidőket jelöl meg, és szűk körre korlátozza a megtagadás lehetséges indokait. Az európai nyomozási határozat az alábbi jogintézmények felváltását szolgálja: a kölcsönös jogsegélyen alapuló eszközök közül a Kölcsönös bűnügyi jogsegélyről szóló európai egyezményt és kiegészítő jegyzőkönyveit; a Schengeni Végrehajtási Egyezményt, az Európai Unió tagállamai közötti kölcsönös bűnügyi jogsegélyről szóló egyezményt és kiegészítő jegyzőkönyvét, és bi-, és multilaterális megállapodásokat. A kölcsönös elismerés elvén alapuló eszközök közül az európai bizonyításfelvételi parancsról szóló kerethatározatot, valamint a vagyonnal vagy bizonyítékkal kapcsolatos biztosítási intézkedést elrendelő határozatok végrehajtásáról szóló kerethatározatot váltja fel.
-
The Effect of the Jurisprudence of the ECHR on the Hungarian Criminal Procedure Act
128-150Views:308The case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human rights set the minimum level for the protection of fundamental rights that has to be guaranteed by all contracting parties, although national laws can establish higher standards. Point II of the general explanations of Bill No. T/13972 on the new Act on Criminal Procedure states that “meeting the requirements of the Fundamental Law of Hungary and the obligations of international law and EU law obviously mean a safeguarding minimum.” In Hungary the case law of the ECHR is reflected more and more both in the judgements of Hungarian courts and in the guidelines of higher courts but the difficulties of establishing interpretations in harmony with ECHR case law are common. The paper analyses the judgments of the ECHR in Hungarian cases between 2013 and 2016 related to pretrial detention, effective defence and the circumstances of restraint.
-
Messages of German and Italian Identity Parades
78-89Views:96All criminal justice systems in rule-of-law states attempt to prevent justizmord cases. Unfortunately, this intention is not always successful. This statement is illustrated by both Hungarian and foreign examples. Both Hungarian and international scientific research reveals that the identity parade (line-up) method plays a key role in the miscarriage of justice cases. So it is important (basic)/vital interest to prepare preventing methods in this field, or to reveal/disclose the causes of final serious mistakes. For this purpose, the author examines the identity practical method and legal (police) rules in Germany and Italy. At the end of the study, the author formulates the potential legal and criminalistic/forensic development possibilities, the lessons and his conclusions for the powerful/efficient and fair criminal procedure rules and for better law enforcement practice.
-
The Constitutional Obstacles before the Promulgation of the Rome Statute
45-59Views:368July 17, 1998, can be considered as one of the most important milestones of the international judicial structure: it is the day when the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted by 120 states out of 148. Article 86 of Statute explicitly states that „States Parties shall […] cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court.” As in the case of every international treaty, the principle of pacta sunt servanda enshrined in Article 26 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties states applies, which explicitly states that “every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.” As has been pointed out by the Permanent Court of International Justice, contracting states must make all the necessary internal measures which are required to fulfil its international obligations rising from a binding treaty. One could ask, why is this quite obvious argument important in the case of Hungary? Well, Hungary has ratified the Statute but still has not implemented it in its internal legislation. This can be considered as a serious constitutional omission, since if the Court would require the cooperation of Hungary – e.g. in the case of an arrest warrant – and it would not be able to fulfil it because of the lack of the internal legal norms, it would be considered as international legal responsibility of Hungary. In this article, I try to explore the reasons behind this omission and outline the possible solutions.
-
Possessing Special Expertise: Review of the Book “Current Challenges of Expert Evidence”
221-224Views:81The book titled "Current Challenges of Expert Evidence” by Mónika Nogel published in 2020 is reviewed in the present article. The review focuses mainly on the author’s thesis which restores confidence in forensic expert reports by constructing the definition of credibility and its criteria.
-
A Cutting-Edge” Criminal Procedure? : Some Reflections on the Modernization of Hungarian Criminal Procedure Law
11-36.Views:302The study analyses the new Hungarian Criminal Procedure Act that entered into force in the summer of 2018. One aspect of the analysis is whether certain institutions of the law fulfil the constitutional requirements of criminal procedure. The other aspect is a sociological one. The past decades have brought many new developments in the field of society, economy and technology. The study, therefore, also revolves around the question of whether the new Criminal Procedure Act provides an adequate response to these challenges. The main finding of the study is that the legislation made the first steps in the right direction, however it did not introduce all the changes that would be necessary for a fair and modern criminal procedure. Besides, the act reflects predominantly the interests of the authorities while the rights and interests of other participants of the criminal procedure are not taken into consideration with the same weight
-
Book review: Csaba Fenyvesi–Csongor Herke–Flórián Tremmel (eds.): Forensic Science (’Kriminalisztika’)
196-202Views:205Although the prosecution of crimes dates back to the creation of the human society, the „science” of investigation in the modern sense, i.e. forensic science, appeared only in the 19th century, and the first comprehensive university textbook on forensic science was published in Hungary in 1965. In the 60 years since then, thanks to the explosion of scientific and technical knowledge, forensic science has undergone radical changes. Edited by Csaba Fenyvesi, Csongor Herke and Flórián Tremmel, the book on Forensic science provides a comprehensive introduction to the concepts of forensic science, the most important elements of criminal technique and criminal tactics. The book is a valuable contribution to the field of forensic science and provides a realistic picture of both the present and the possible future of forensic science. This book review discusses the importance of the book for forensic science, based on certain specific institutions of forensic science.
-
Some theoretical and Practical Issues of Sentencing
11-25Views:276Sentencing is connected to the trial stage of the criminal procedure; more precisely, it takes place at its end. Judges fulfil only a part, and not even the hardest one, of their duty by establishing criminal liability as a result of the evidentiary procedure. Sentencing is a rather complex and complicated process. Judges face a lot of expectations: they often have to reconcile contradictory expectations with each other in order to impose a satisfactory sentence for the parties. The process of sentencing has received intense criticism. Sometimes judges are accused of imposing unduly lenient sentences or criticized for too severe punishments.
Another problem is presented by the fact that different sentences are passed for crimes of the same sort at different courts in the country. Sentencing thus raises many theoretical questions that I seek to answer in the study.
-
Basic Trial Rights and Trial Ethics in Criminal Proceedings
32-55Views:194The number of criminal court trials is constantly decreasing, as the domestic legislature has introduced a number of legal institutions aimed at diverting criminal cases from the court system, or avoiding charging. Nevertheless, there will always be crimes, the adjudication of which cannot dispense with impeachment based on direct judicial investigation. The trial is undoubtedly the "highlight" of the criminal proceedings, since it is here that the adversarial process takes place in its entirety, and here the defense counsel and the prosecutor have the opportunity to form opinions on factual and legal issues in each other's personal presence. The amendment of the Criminal Procedure Act naturally raised many questions, such as who in the near future will actually control the evidence taken in court proceedings, and what basic procedural rights should be provided to the participants of the proceedings. In this study, I would like to reflect primarily on these questions, based on some ECtHR decisions.