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:  social representative
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The publication presents the assumptions of participation of social organizations in the Polish criminal proceedings. This idea was formed in the 60s of last century. As a result, the representative of social organisation was introduced to the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1969. Its task was to defend the interest of society, mainly the social property and the citizens’ rights. Next, the author discusses the evolution of this idea. The task of the representative of social organization in the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1997 is to protect the goods, which are important for the general public and individual matters of citizens. The representative of social organization is also a friend of the court (amicus curiae). It presents the legal opinions on recognized matters to the court and helps to resolve them. It is an element of citizens’ participation in justice. Great reform of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 2013 maintained this idea.
EN
The article presents arguments for the position that the social representative referred to in Art. 90 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, may participate in immunity proceedings, which are “judicial proceedings” within the meaning of the law and the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court. Therefore, the view according to which a social representative cannot participate in the immunity proceedings is erroneous, since these proceedings are only an element of the preparatory proceedings, and therefore are not “judicial proceedings”. Thus, no legislative change is necessary for a representative of a social organization to participate in the immunity proceedings
PL
W artykule przedstawiono argumentację na rzecz stanowiska, że przedstawiciel społeczny, o którym mowa w art. 90 § 1 Kodeksu postępowania karnego, może brać udział w postępowaniu immunitetowym, będącym „postępowaniem sądowym” w rozumieniu prawa i orzecznictwa Sądu Najwyższego. Błędny jest zatem pogląd, zgodnie z którym przedstawiciel społeczny nie może uczestniczyć w postępowaniu immunitetowym, gdyż postępowanie to jest wyłącznie elementem postępowania przygotowawczego, a więc nie jest „postępowaniem sądowym”. Aby przedstawiciel organizacji społecznej mógł brać udział w postępowaniu immunitetowym, nie jest tym samym konieczna żadna zmiana legislacyjna.
3
58%
PL
The article analyses the rights and duties of a social representative in criminal proceedings (article 90 Code of Criminal Procedure). Participation in court proceedings may be declared, before the commencement of judicial examination, by a representative of a community organisation, if there is a need to defend a social interest or an important individual interest within the statutory purposes of such an organisation, especially in matters pertaining to the protection of human rights and freedoms. The representative of a community organisation who has been admitted to participate in court proceedings may participate in the trial, express their points of view and make statements in writing. The court shall admit a representative of a community organisation if it finds this to be in the interests of justice. This person shall not be allowed to ask questions to person questioned by the court, he has no right to make a complaint with the court, can`t submit motions for evidence and are not entitled to participate in a session or in an investigation. The author emphasizes the importance of participation by the citizenry in the administration of justice principle and the right to a fair and public hearing of his case. In article they were also discussed old draft bills in the position of social representative in criminal cases, and in particular the advantages and disadvantages of amending article 90 c.c.p. Amendment of 10 June 2016. The author argues that the changing of position will not increase the participation of the public in the proceedings, because the legislature did not admit procedural rights.
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.