FACTUAL SUPPORT OF THE GUILTY PLEA AND SENTENCE BARGAINING DURING THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - THE MACEDONIAN EXPERIENCE

Boban Misoski
{"title":"FACTUAL SUPPORT OF THE GUILTY PLEA AND SENTENCE BARGAINING DURING THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - THE MACEDONIAN EXPERIENCE","authors":"Boban Misoski","doi":"10.25234/eclic/11913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As part of its EU accession agenda, Republic of North Macedonia has performed series of reforms of its legal system in order to reach EU legal standards. As part of this agenda, improvement of the efficiency of the criminal trials was marked as highly relevant. New Law on Criminal Procedure, consisting many modern adversarial trial instruments, enacted in 2010, supposed to improve the efficiency of the Macedonian criminal trials. However, after a certain period we deem that it is necessary to reevaluate the effects of these reforms and their practical implementation. Hence, the author evaluates the Macedonian court’s practice of implementation of the defendant’s guilty plea during the main hearing of the criminal procedure together with the reasons for decline in the use of these instruments into the court’s practice. The main reasons for such decline of the implementation in practice can be located in several areas. Such areas are improper implementation of the law, legal imperfections together with the length of the criminal trials, lesser sanctioning policy and absence of proper instrument for providing of the expected sentence as an outcome from the bargaining procedure. However, besides these already known weak areas concerning the implementation of these instruments in practice the author has detected an additional problematic area about the factual support of the guilty plea during the main hearing. In addition, the author analyzes the practice of evaluation of additional evidence in case of guilty plea, and the amount and the quality of evidence provided by the prosecutor as support to the defendant’s guilty plea. Author concludes that there is a gap between the theoretical definitions of the guilty plea and its practical implementation, and provides practical proposals for improvement of the provisions of the Law on Criminal Procedure. He concludes that these amendments are necessary for proper implementation of the Law and of the protection of the defendant’s rights and pertaining the impression of just criminal procedure in cases when defendant pleads guilty.","PeriodicalId":448091,"journal":{"name":"EU 2020 – lessons from the past and solutions for the future","volume":"93 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EU 2020 – lessons from the past and solutions for the future","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25234/eclic/11913","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As part of its EU accession agenda, Republic of North Macedonia has performed series of reforms of its legal system in order to reach EU legal standards. As part of this agenda, improvement of the efficiency of the criminal trials was marked as highly relevant. New Law on Criminal Procedure, consisting many modern adversarial trial instruments, enacted in 2010, supposed to improve the efficiency of the Macedonian criminal trials. However, after a certain period we deem that it is necessary to reevaluate the effects of these reforms and their practical implementation. Hence, the author evaluates the Macedonian court’s practice of implementation of the defendant’s guilty plea during the main hearing of the criminal procedure together with the reasons for decline in the use of these instruments into the court’s practice. The main reasons for such decline of the implementation in practice can be located in several areas. Such areas are improper implementation of the law, legal imperfections together with the length of the criminal trials, lesser sanctioning policy and absence of proper instrument for providing of the expected sentence as an outcome from the bargaining procedure. However, besides these already known weak areas concerning the implementation of these instruments in practice the author has detected an additional problematic area about the factual support of the guilty plea during the main hearing. In addition, the author analyzes the practice of evaluation of additional evidence in case of guilty plea, and the amount and the quality of evidence provided by the prosecutor as support to the defendant’s guilty plea. Author concludes that there is a gap between the theoretical definitions of the guilty plea and its practical implementation, and provides practical proposals for improvement of the provisions of the Law on Criminal Procedure. He concludes that these amendments are necessary for proper implementation of the Law and of the protection of the defendant’s rights and pertaining the impression of just criminal procedure in cases when defendant pleads guilty.
刑事诉讼中认罪与量刑讨价还价的事实支持——马其顿经验
作为加入欧盟议程的一部分,北马其顿共和国对其法律制度进行了一系列改革,以达到欧盟的法律标准。作为这一议程的一部分,提高刑事审判的效率被认为是高度相关的。2010年颁布的《新刑事诉讼法》包含许多现代对抗性审判文书,旨在提高马其顿刑事审判的效率。然而,经过一段时间后,我们认为有必要重新评估这些改革及其实际执行的效果。因此,撰文人评价了马其顿法院在刑事程序主要审理期间执行被告认罪的做法,以及法院在实践中减少使用这些文书的原因。在实践中,这种执行下降的主要原因可以定位在几个方面。这些方面是法律执行不当、法律不完善以及刑事审判时间过长、制裁政策较弱以及缺乏适当的文书作为谈判程序的结果提供预期的判决。然而,除了这些在实践中执行这些文书方面已知的薄弱方面之外,发件人还发现了另一个有问题的方面,即在主要听证会期间对认罪的事实支持。此外,作者还分析了认罪案件补充证据的评估实践,以及检察官为被告认罪提供的证据的数量和质量。作者认为,认罪的理论定义与认罪的实际实施存在差距,并对我国刑事诉讼法的相关规定提出了完善建议。他的结论是,这些修正案对于适当执行《法律》和保护被告的权利以及在被告认罪的案件中形成公正的刑事诉讼程序的印象是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信