Search

Search Results

• About the necessity of a new criminal act: or notes on the criminal offense of agreement in restraint of competition in public procurement and concession procedures

  99-121

  Zsolt Tibor Szabó

  Views:

  415

  The criminal act included in Subsection 1 Section 420 of Act C of 2012 on the Criminal Code (hereinafter referred to as Criminal Code) is the only one in the entire Criminal Code where the disposition includes the public procurement procedure as an element of the criminal act. In spite of this, further punishable criminal acts may be associated with the public procurement procedure which are inevitably committed or  completed in terms of the legal stadia of the crime, provided that any criminal relationship is established between the parties when public funds are allocated during the course of a tendering procedure.

  The non-exhaustive examples of the – examined – conduct subject to proceedings show that the basis of an unfair public procurement procedure is the committing of any of the corruption criminal offenses, and then, after the public procurement procedure had been concluded, the felony of agreement in restraint of competition will constitute the criminal act without prejudice to the ne bis in idem principle, i.e. the criminal act specified in Subsection (1) Section 420 of the Criminal Code is not the definition of public procurement corruption. In order to verify this, I will outline what I personally understand as public procurement corruption.

  The primary aim of the study is to support the argument that the delict referred to above is unable to fulfil the intention of the legislator, namely decreasing public procurement corruption. As a secondary focus,  the reasons behind the necessity of a new criminal act are referred to.

• Basic Trial Rights and Trial Ethics in Criminal Proceedings

  32-55

  Viktor Bérces

  Views:

  173

  The 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.

• Possessing Special Expertise: Review of the Book “Current Challenges of Expert Evidence”

  221-224

  Orsolya Eszter Kovács

  Views:

  71

  The 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.

• Public Hearing as a Safeguard of Fair Trial in Criminal Proceedings

  46-61

  Tamás Háger

  Views:

  148

  The primary aim of my paper is to examine the questions related to the institute of public hearing. As we know, publicity is one of the most important safeguards of fair trial in criminal procedure. In my opinion, it is necessary to examine these procedural questions in a scientific depth in the light of both the case decisions of the High Courts and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The study examines one of the important pledges of a fair trial, the effectiveness of the basic principle of publicity in the criminal procedure. It explores the principle from a dogmatic point of view, and also in the light of both the European standards and the regulations currently in force. It mentions the limitation and exclusion of publicity, and the legal consequences of violating publicity in a great detail. Classic legal institutes are shifted into new dimensions by the technical improvements of the modern world and the media broadcasts from courts, and the paper points it out that for the sake of having an undisturbed court hearing and verification, some modifications on certain legal regulations may be justified. The study also mentions the standpoints of legal literature regarding the notion of publicity in detail, and by summarizing them it attempts to define the notion of the given basic principle as per aspects of law science, considering the characteristics of the 21st century. After the establishment of law theory principles, besides introducing the regulation in force and touching upon court practice, my paper analyzes questions that are more and more current, especially due to the reports by the electronic media, which sometimes cannot only disturb the order of the court, but also the procedure of verification. So, after the examination of basic hypotheses and the legal institute, it draws the conclusion that the development of the legal institute justifies the modification of the procedural law in the future, especially in connection with informing the press.