Review of the Resolutions of the Supreme Court Criminal Chamber Concerning Substantive and Procedural Criminal Law in 2021

Ryszard A. Stefański
{"title":"Review of the Resolutions of the Supreme Court Criminal Chamber Concerning Substantive and Procedural Criminal Law in 2021","authors":"Ryszard A. Stefański","doi":"10.26399/iusnovum.v16.4.2022.39-r.a.stefanski","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary The article is of a scientific and research nature, and its subject is an analysis of the resolutions and decisions of the Supreme Court Criminal Chamber in the field of procedural criminal law issued in 2021, as a result of the examination of the so-called legal questions. The subject of the considerations are: the absence of a public prosecutor at the main hearing and his conviction without taking evidence proceedings (Article 387 § 2 of the CCP), a complaint against the decision of the appellate court to revoke a preventive measure (Article 426 § 2 of the CCP), the conditions for deciding by the highest court of legal issues (Article 441 § 1 of the CCP), compensation for undoubtedly unjustified temporary arrest or detention (Article 552 § 4 of the CCP), reimbursement of the costs of appointing a defense attorney (Article 632 (2) of the CCP), funds in a bank account as material evidence (Article 86 (13) of the Act on Counteracting Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, Article 106a of the Banking Act), proceedings under the existing provisions (Article 25 (3) of the Act of 11 March 2016 amending the Act – the Code of Criminal Procedure and certain other acts), presentation to the Supreme Court to resolve legal issues (Article 82 § 1 and Article 83 § 1 of the Act on the Court of above). The research basically aims to evaluate the legitimacy of this body’s interpretation of the regulations covering the legal issues referred to the Supreme Court for resolution. The main research theses consist in showing that the so-called legal questions referred to the Supreme Court play an important role in ensuring the uniformity of common and military courts’ judgements because the body’s stand is based on in-depth reasoning. The research findings are original in nature as they creatively develop the interpretation contained in the resolutions analysed. The range of the research is mainly national. The article is especially important for science because it contains a deepened dogmatic analysis and a big load of theoretical thought as well as it is practically useful as it enriches the Supreme Court’s arguments or refers to circumstances justifying different opinions.","PeriodicalId":33501,"journal":{"name":"Ius Novum","volume":"16 1","pages":"90 - 115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ius Novum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26399/iusnovum.v16.4.2022.39-r.a.stefanski","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

Summary The article is of a scientific and research nature, and its subject is an analysis of the resolutions and decisions of the Supreme Court Criminal Chamber in the field of procedural criminal law issued in 2021, as a result of the examination of the so-called legal questions. The subject of the considerations are: the absence of a public prosecutor at the main hearing and his conviction without taking evidence proceedings (Article 387 § 2 of the CCP), a complaint against the decision of the appellate court to revoke a preventive measure (Article 426 § 2 of the CCP), the conditions for deciding by the highest court of legal issues (Article 441 § 1 of the CCP), compensation for undoubtedly unjustified temporary arrest or detention (Article 552 § 4 of the CCP), reimbursement of the costs of appointing a defense attorney (Article 632 (2) of the CCP), funds in a bank account as material evidence (Article 86 (13) of the Act on Counteracting Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, Article 106a of the Banking Act), proceedings under the existing provisions (Article 25 (3) of the Act of 11 March 2016 amending the Act – the Code of Criminal Procedure and certain other acts), presentation to the Supreme Court to resolve legal issues (Article 82 § 1 and Article 83 § 1 of the Act on the Court of above). The research basically aims to evaluate the legitimacy of this body’s interpretation of the regulations covering the legal issues referred to the Supreme Court for resolution. The main research theses consist in showing that the so-called legal questions referred to the Supreme Court play an important role in ensuring the uniformity of common and military courts’ judgements because the body’s stand is based on in-depth reasoning. The research findings are original in nature as they creatively develop the interpretation contained in the resolutions analysed. The range of the research is mainly national. The article is especially important for science because it contains a deepened dogmatic analysis and a big load of theoretical thought as well as it is practically useful as it enriches the Supreme Court’s arguments or refers to circumstances justifying different opinions.
2021年最高法院刑事分庭关于实体和程序刑法的决议审查
摘要本文具有科学和研究性质,主题是对2021年最高法院刑事分庭在程序刑法领域发布的决议和决定的分析,这是对所谓法律问题的审查结果。考虑的主题是:公诉人缺席主要听证会并在没有采取证据程序的情况下被定罪(《刑事诉讼法》第387条第2款),对上诉法院撤销预防措施的决定提出申诉(《刑事上诉法》第426条第2条),最高法院对法律问题作出裁决的条件(《刑事案件法》第441条第1款),对毫无疑问不合理的临时逮捕或拘留的赔偿(《反洗钱法》第552条第4款)、任命辩护律师的费用报销(《反腐败法》第632条第(2)款)、银行账户中的资金作为物证(《打击洗钱和恐怖主义融资法》第86条第(13)款、《银行法》第106a条),根据现有条款提起诉讼(2016年3月11日修订该法案的法案第25(3)条——《刑事诉讼法》和某些其他法案),向最高法院提交以解决法律问题(上述法院法案第82条第1款和第83条第1条)。这项研究的基本目的是评估该机构对涉及提交最高法院解决的法律问题的法规的解释的合法性。主要研究论文表明,提交给最高法院的所谓法律问题在确保普通法院和军事法院判决的一致性方面发挥着重要作用,因为该机构的立场是基于深入的推理。研究结果具有独创性,因为它们创造性地发展了所分析决议中包含的解释。研究范围主要是全国性的。这篇文章对科学尤其重要,因为它包含了深入的教条主义分析和大量的理论思想,而且它在实践中很有用,因为它丰富了最高法院的论点或引用了证明不同意见的情况。
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
9
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