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

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 2 Problemy Prawa Karnego

Authors help

  1. 2 Limańska A.

  2. 1 Pustuła M.

Years help

  1. 1 2021

  2. 1 2020

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Brak obowiązku stawiennictwa oskarżyciela publicznego na rozprawie w kontekście podstawowych zasad procesu karnego

100%
Limańska A.
Problemy Prawa Karnego
|
2018
|
vol. 2 (28)
|
issue 2
125-136
EN
The principle of legalism places upon the public prosecutor the obligation o pressing charges to a court of law and then to support this claim in the course of the lawsuit. It seems obvious that in order to execute this duty in an appropriate manner, the public prosecutor should attend the trial and actively participate in it. However, in regulation Art. 46 §2 k.p.k., which was introduced by way of an amendment issued on 11 March 2016, the legislator stipulated a regulation which permits the public prosecutor not to appear during the trial, if the preliminary legal proceedings concluded in the form of investigation. Obviously, the task of this regulation is to accelerate the proceedings in cases of lesser calibre, which are cases in which an investigation is conducted. However, it is necessary to consider the aforementioned regulation in the context of the basic principles of a criminal lawsuit and the analysis of the consequences of such regulations. Therefore, in the first instance one made reference to the most important regulations contained in the basis acts of international law, i.e. the European Convention of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which emphasise above all the significance of independence and impartiality, as well as the principle of a quick and efficient operation of the procedure. It was also necessary to refer the substantive regulation to the principle of the contradictoriness of the criminal lawsuit, which stipulates inter alia the separation of lawsuit-related roles and the passivity of the court in reference to the initiative of the parties who argue their cases.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Pozycja pokrzywdzonego w świetle nowelizacji Kodeksu postępowania karnego z 19 lipca 2019 r.

63%
Limańska A., Pustuła M.
Problemy Prawa Karnego
|
2020
|
vol. 4 (30)
|
issue 4
127-148
EN
This article addresses some amendments of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure in so far as they affect the position of the injured party. The Act of 19 July 2019 amending the Polish Code of Criminal Code provides for a number of changes relating to that participant of criminal proceedings. The paper deals with the extension of the time limit within which it is possible to withdraw a motion to prosecute, changes to the so-called subsidiary complaint, setting a deadline for questioning the injured under Articles 185a and 185c of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure or serving the injured party with an order to pay (injunctive judgment) alongside the instructions on how to appeal against the judgment and simultaneously file a statement that the injured will act in the capacity of a subsidiary prosecution counsel. The analysis is aimed to establish whether those changes have led to the strengthening or weakening of the position of the injured party.
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.