Disciplinary custodial penalty under Article 49 1 of the act of 27th July 2001 law on the common courts system as an isolation coercive measure used in the criminal process

Probacja Pub Date : 2023-11-30 DOI:10.5604/01.3001.0054.1473
Dariusz Kala
{"title":"Disciplinary custodial penalty under Article 49 1 of the act of 27th July 2001 law on the common courts system as an isolation coercive measure used in the criminal process","authors":"Dariusz Kala","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0054.1473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Legal coercion is framed by certain norms. It takes an institutionalized form, while its use is legal and under social control. Unlawful coercion, on the other hand, is characterized by illegality (it is not based on the existing legal order). Legal coercion can be reduced to physical (physical coercion) or psychological (mental coercion) influence. The disciplinary custodial penalty is a means of legal coercion and is the most severe. This measure is classically isolationist, depriving the punished person of personal (locomotive) freedom. The behavior for which it is possible to impose the indicated disciplinary penalty boils down to a violation by the guilty person of the solemnity, peace or order of court activities. Its application serves the realization of procedural functions, which, on the grounds of criminal proceedings, should be reduced primarily to the realization of the conditions for a substantively correct (Article 2 1 point 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) and time-focused (Article 2 1 point 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 45 paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland) final resolution of the case being tried. Since the disciplinary penalty of Article 49 1 of the Act of 27th July 2001 Law on the common courts system, in its isolation form, is a measure that harms such a fundamental good as personal freedom, its adjudication should be carried out with due moderation and caution. In contrast, the very size of this extraordinarily troublesome disciplinary penalty must consider the nature of the offense (which, as a rule, has a significant burden of social harmfulness), the personal conditions of the punished person and the degree of guilt.","PeriodicalId":34028,"journal":{"name":"Probacja","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Probacja","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0054.1473","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

Legal coercion is framed by certain norms. It takes an institutionalized form, while its use is legal and under social control. Unlawful coercion, on the other hand, is characterized by illegality (it is not based on the existing legal order). Legal coercion can be reduced to physical (physical coercion) or psychological (mental coercion) influence. The disciplinary custodial penalty is a means of legal coercion and is the most severe. This measure is classically isolationist, depriving the punished person of personal (locomotive) freedom. The behavior for which it is possible to impose the indicated disciplinary penalty boils down to a violation by the guilty person of the solemnity, peace or order of court activities. Its application serves the realization of procedural functions, which, on the grounds of criminal proceedings, should be reduced primarily to the realization of the conditions for a substantively correct (Article 2 1 point 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) and time-focused (Article 2 1 point 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 45 paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland) final resolution of the case being tried. Since the disciplinary penalty of Article 49 1 of the Act of 27th July 2001 Law on the common courts system, in its isolation form, is a measure that harms such a fundamental good as personal freedom, its adjudication should be carried out with due moderation and caution. In contrast, the very size of this extraordinarily troublesome disciplinary penalty must consider the nature of the offense (which, as a rule, has a significant burden of social harmfulness), the personal conditions of the punished person and the degree of guilt.
2001 年 7 月 27 日关于普通法院系统的法律第 49 条第 1 款规定的惩戒性监禁刑罚是刑事诉讼中使用的一种隔离强制措施
法律胁迫以某些规范为框架。它采取制度化的形式,其使用是合法的,并受到社会的控制。另一方面,非法胁迫的特点是不合法(不以现有法律秩序为基础)。合法强制可以简化为身体(物理强制)或心理(精神强制)影响。惩戒性拘留处罚是法律强制的一种手段,也是最严厉的一种手段。这种措施是典型的孤立主义,剥夺了受罚者的人身(机车)自由。可以处以指定纪律处分的行为归根结底是罪犯违反了法庭活动的庄严、和平或秩序。纪律处分的适用是为了实现程序职能,在刑事诉讼中,程序职能应主要简化为实现实质上正确(《刑事诉讼法典》第 2 条第 1 款第 1 点)和时间上集中(《刑事诉讼法典》第 2 条第 1 款第 4 点,《波兰共和国宪法》第 45 条第 1 款)的条件,最终解决正在审理的案件。由于 2001 年 7 月 27 日《普通法院系统法》第 49 条第 1 款规定的纪律处分,以其孤立的形式,是一种损害个人自由等基本利益的措施,因此,在对其进行裁决时,应适当节制和谨慎。相反,这种异常麻烦的纪律处分的大小必须考虑到违法行为的性质(通常具有重大的社会危害性)、被处罚人的个人条件和犯罪程度。
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
21
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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