公平审判权利,未决刑事案件的审前民事动议和滥用法院程序,涉及自由州石棉审前动议程序

C. Swanepoel
{"title":"公平审判权利,未决刑事案件的审前民事动议和滥用法院程序,涉及自由州石棉审前动议程序","authors":"C. Swanepoel","doi":"10.47348/sacj/v36/i1a2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"South Africans have become accustomed to almost daily news reports of litigation in our courts that involve politically powerful and well-connected individuals. The perception by the public is that in many instances litigants approach the courts for other reasons than achieving justice and are therefore misusing our courts and its processes.1 This becomes a matter of concern when such perceptions affect the trust and confidence that the public holds in respect of the judicial system and the rule of law. The recent Free State asbestos pre-trial motion proceedings illustrate some of these concerns. This article first comments on the judgment of the Free State high court in this matter, and focusses on the unmeritorious aspects of the applications made. These aspects included a claim that the applicants’ right to a fair trial were infringed, and the applicants’ disregard for the established principle against preliminary civil motions emanating from criminal proceedings. Legal practitioners advise their clients and must do so responsibly. For that reason, the second part of the article comments on the professional rules of conduct against the abuse of the court process in relation to legal practitioners’ obligations to both their clients and the court. This duty includes not to litigate causes or raise defences that have little chance of success or where they are initiated by litigants for purposes other than achieving justice. Improper purposes include delaying the proceedings to escape criminal liability and ultimately, accountability. In order to curb pre-trial litigation in any court other than the criminal trial court, the article proposes an extension of the Criminal Procedure Act to clarify when such other court may be approached for relief. It also proposes that a certificate of probable cause accompanies all pre-trial motions that emanate from criminal proceedings in a court other than the trial court.","PeriodicalId":256796,"journal":{"name":"South African journal of criminal justice","volume":"141 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fair trial rights, pre-trial civil motions in pending criminal cases and abuse of court process with reference to the Free State asbestos pre-trial motion proceedings\",\"authors\":\"C. Swanepoel\",\"doi\":\"10.47348/sacj/v36/i1a2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"South Africans have become accustomed to almost daily news reports of litigation in our courts that involve politically powerful and well-connected individuals. The perception by the public is that in many instances litigants approach the courts for other reasons than achieving justice and are therefore misusing our courts and its processes.1 This becomes a matter of concern when such perceptions affect the trust and confidence that the public holds in respect of the judicial system and the rule of law. The recent Free State asbestos pre-trial motion proceedings illustrate some of these concerns. This article first comments on the judgment of the Free State high court in this matter, and focusses on the unmeritorious aspects of the applications made. These aspects included a claim that the applicants’ right to a fair trial were infringed, and the applicants’ disregard for the established principle against preliminary civil motions emanating from criminal proceedings. Legal practitioners advise their clients and must do so responsibly. For that reason, the second part of the article comments on the professional rules of conduct against the abuse of the court process in relation to legal practitioners’ obligations to both their clients and the court. This duty includes not to litigate causes or raise defences that have little chance of success or where they are initiated by litigants for purposes other than achieving justice. Improper purposes include delaying the proceedings to escape criminal liability and ultimately, accountability. In order to curb pre-trial litigation in any court other than the criminal trial court, the article proposes an extension of the Criminal Procedure Act to clarify when such other court may be approached for relief. It also proposes that a certificate of probable cause accompanies all pre-trial motions that emanate from criminal proceedings in a court other than the trial court.\",\"PeriodicalId\":256796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African journal of criminal justice\",\"volume\":\"141 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\":\"South African journal of criminal justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47348/sacj/v36/i1a2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African journal of criminal justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/sacj/v36/i1a2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

南非人已经习惯了几乎每天都有关于法院诉讼的新闻报道,这些诉讼涉及政治上有权势和关系良好的个人。公众的看法是,在许多情况下,诉讼当事人为了其他原因而不是为了实现正义而诉诸法院,因此滥用了我们的法院及其程序当这种看法影响到公众对司法制度和法治的信任和信心时,这就成为一个令人关切的问题。最近自由邦石棉案的审前动议程序说明了其中一些问题。本文首先评论自由邦高等法院在这个问题上的判决,并集中讨论所提出申请的不正当方面。这些方面包括声称申请人获得公平审判的权利受到侵犯,以及申请人无视既定原则,反对由刑事诉讼产生的初步民事动议。法律从业人员为客户提供建议,必须负责任地这样做。为此,本条第二部分就法律从业人员对其委托人和法院的义务方面,评论了防止滥用法庭程序的专业行为规则。这一义务包括不就几乎没有成功机会的案件提起诉讼或提出抗辩,或不就诉讼当事人为实现正义以外的目的提出抗辩。不正当目的包括拖延诉讼程序以逃避刑事责任,并最终逃避责任。为了遏制刑事审判法院以外的任何法院的审前诉讼,该条建议延长《刑事诉讼法》,以澄清何时可以向其他法院寻求救济。它还建议,在审判法院以外的法院进行的刑事诉讼中提出的所有审前动议都应附有可能的理由证明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fair trial rights, pre-trial civil motions in pending criminal cases and abuse of court process with reference to the Free State asbestos pre-trial motion proceedings
South Africans have become accustomed to almost daily news reports of litigation in our courts that involve politically powerful and well-connected individuals. The perception by the public is that in many instances litigants approach the courts for other reasons than achieving justice and are therefore misusing our courts and its processes.1 This becomes a matter of concern when such perceptions affect the trust and confidence that the public holds in respect of the judicial system and the rule of law. The recent Free State asbestos pre-trial motion proceedings illustrate some of these concerns. This article first comments on the judgment of the Free State high court in this matter, and focusses on the unmeritorious aspects of the applications made. These aspects included a claim that the applicants’ right to a fair trial were infringed, and the applicants’ disregard for the established principle against preliminary civil motions emanating from criminal proceedings. Legal practitioners advise their clients and must do so responsibly. For that reason, the second part of the article comments on the professional rules of conduct against the abuse of the court process in relation to legal practitioners’ obligations to both their clients and the court. This duty includes not to litigate causes or raise defences that have little chance of success or where they are initiated by litigants for purposes other than achieving justice. Improper purposes include delaying the proceedings to escape criminal liability and ultimately, accountability. In order to curb pre-trial litigation in any court other than the criminal trial court, the article proposes an extension of the Criminal Procedure Act to clarify when such other court may be approached for relief. It also proposes that a certificate of probable cause accompanies all pre-trial motions that emanate from criminal proceedings in a court other than the trial court.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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