Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  PREPARATORY PROCEEDINGS
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR'S COMPETENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES

100%
Stafanski R. A.
Ius Novum
|
2009
|
issue 2
45-63
EN
The subject matter of the article is the public prosecutor's competence to conduct preparatory proceedings and to take part in the jurisdiction proceedings. The author criticizes the lack of a statutory definition of the prosecutor's competence to conduct or supervise preparatory proceedings and he calls for its definition in the criminal proceedings code in a similar way to court's competence. He proposes that prosecutors of the district public prosecutor's office could conduct and supervise investigations into crimes within the competence of a district court, and prosecutors of the departments for organized crime could conduct and supervise investigations into terrorism, organized crime and bribery. Territorial competence would depend on the location of the scene of crime. It would be necessary to exempt the competence of the Public Prosecutor General or the Country Prosecutor to decide on public prosecutor's competence to conduct preparatory proceedings. In case of public prosecutor's competence to take part in judiciary proceedings, there should be a rule that a public prosecutor taking part in judiciary proceedings should be from the public prosecutor's office whose prosecutor conducted preparatory proceeding or from a superior unit
2
Content available remote

FUTURE MODEL OF PREPARATORY PROCEEDINGS

100%
Stefanski R. A.
Ius Novum
|
2009
|
issue 1
20-34
EN
Inefficiency of the present model of preparatory proceedings, which results in the significant lengthening of the whole penal procedure and causes inability to finish it within reasonable time limits, creates a necessity to develop a new model. It is suggested that in the model to be developed preparatory proceedings should not play the present role and clarify all the circumstances of an event and obtain all the evidence for a successful prosecution. Evidence and its contents should be only amassed during preparatory proceedings and they should be clarified during a trial. At this stage of a penal procedure, it should be only established whether there are substantial grounds to draw up charges against somebody and protect evidence that cannot be repeated at a trial. It is to help a public prosecutor take a decision whether to bring an accusation or drop the charges and refrain from prosecution. Only non-repeatable actions should be conducted by a judge responsible for the proceedings. A formation of such a model of these proceedings requires resignation from the rule of material truth and restructuring a trial to make it more contradictory that may be achieved by, among other things, depriving a court of an ability to perform acts of taking evidence in the proceedings as its official duty. Prosecutors as those who act mainly as public prosecutors should be located close to courts. Implementation of such a model would undoubtedly speed the performance of penal procedure and thanks to that we would put an end to one of the maladies of our legal system, lengthy duration of proceedings.
3

PRÍKAZ NA ZAISTENIE DÔKAZOV V EURÓPSKEJ ÚNII

75%
Lindáková M.
Právny obzor. Teoretický časopis pre otázky štátu a práva (Juridical Review. Theoretical journal for the questions of state and law)
|
2011
|
vol. 94
|
issue 5
454 – 461
EN
One of prerequisites of effective cooperation among the EU Member States in the area of criminal law is not only the theoretical definition, but also the legal regulation of exact procedures, methods and conditions of this cooperation. These intentions resulted in the Act No. 650/2005 Coll. on the execution in the European Union of orders for freezing of property and evidence and on amendment of certain acts („Act“), that represents the transposition of the Council Framework Decision 2003/577/SVV of 22 July 2003 on the execution in the European Union of orders to freeze property and evidence („Framework Decision“) into the national law of the Slovak Republic. This instrument has become the legislative basis and prerequisite of effective cooperation of the individual States in criminal matters with the aim to simplify the process of taking evidence in criminal proceedings. In her article the author refers to the individual conditions and procedures for successful application of this instrument in the practice and in the conclusion evaluated, from her point of view and on the basis of available findings, the usage rate of this instrument in the conditions of the Slovak Republic.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.