拘留-国内和国际立法分析(理论与实践)

Vesna Trajanovska, N. Jovanova
{"title":"拘留-国内和国际立法分析(理论与实践)","authors":"Vesna Trajanovska, N. Jovanova","doi":"10.20544/icp.11.01.20.p22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper elaborates the key role of detention in criminal proceedings and provides guidance for its successful application in accordance with the domestic and international legal standards and human rights. Furthermore, it emphasizes the importance of the implementation of other measures to ensure defendant’s presence and successful criminal case (hereinafter referred as alternative measures). The way in which analysis of detention is applied in North Macedonian judiciary, indicates significant deficiencies in decisions ordering and continuation of this measure expressed by inadequate explanations of the legal grounds. Namely, the conclusion is that the explanations are stereotyped, non-individualized and include a retelling of the legal text of the Law on Criminal Procedure. Inescapable impression is that the approach of judges when assessing which measure to be enforced, often begins and ends with detention, instead first evaluating the possibilities afforded by other provisions of the criminal procedural legislation and which do not lead to strictly limiting the freedom of the defendant, but they mean imposing injunctions, restrictions or obligations. The practice applied in the field of detention in North Macedonia is very common in the context of public arrests of subjects. Entities taken into custody are considered guilty since the beginning, and it is forgotten they are innocent until proven otherwise. In terms of the new law on criminal procedure, the presence of three key UNITS in deciding detention is highlighted, and those are: primary suspicion for committing a crime, explaining the grounds for granting custody and explaining why any alternative measures are not implemented. Combining alternative measures can bring results, but unfortunately in North Macedonia it is not used. Finally, this paper underlines that there must be relevant and specific 142 reasons before adoption of detention, and not making exceptions and emphasizing exaggerated and misused role of the media in the act of arresting.","PeriodicalId":369411,"journal":{"name":"THE EURO-ATLANTIC VALUES IN THE BALKAN COUNTRIES","volume":"716 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DETENTION - ANALYSIS OF THE DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION (THEORY AND PRACTICE)\",\"authors\":\"Vesna Trajanovska, N. Jovanova\",\"doi\":\"10.20544/icp.11.01.20.p22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper elaborates the key role of detention in criminal proceedings and provides guidance for its successful application in accordance with the domestic and international legal standards and human rights. Furthermore, it emphasizes the importance of the implementation of other measures to ensure defendant’s presence and successful criminal case (hereinafter referred as alternative measures). The way in which analysis of detention is applied in North Macedonian judiciary, indicates significant deficiencies in decisions ordering and continuation of this measure expressed by inadequate explanations of the legal grounds. Namely, the conclusion is that the explanations are stereotyped, non-individualized and include a retelling of the legal text of the Law on Criminal Procedure. Inescapable impression is that the approach of judges when assessing which measure to be enforced, often begins and ends with detention, instead first evaluating the possibilities afforded by other provisions of the criminal procedural legislation and which do not lead to strictly limiting the freedom of the defendant, but they mean imposing injunctions, restrictions or obligations. The practice applied in the field of detention in North Macedonia is very common in the context of public arrests of subjects. Entities taken into custody are considered guilty since the beginning, and it is forgotten they are innocent until proven otherwise. In terms of the new law on criminal procedure, the presence of three key UNITS in deciding detention is highlighted, and those are: primary suspicion for committing a crime, explaining the grounds for granting custody and explaining why any alternative measures are not implemented. Combining alternative measures can bring results, but unfortunately in North Macedonia it is not used. Finally, this paper underlines that there must be relevant and specific 142 reasons before adoption of detention, and not making exceptions and emphasizing exaggerated and misused role of the media in the act of arresting.\",\"PeriodicalId\":369411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"THE EURO-ATLANTIC VALUES IN THE BALKAN COUNTRIES\",\"volume\":\"716 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"THE EURO-ATLANTIC VALUES IN THE BALKAN COUNTRIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20544/icp.11.01.20.p22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THE EURO-ATLANTIC VALUES IN THE BALKAN COUNTRIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20544/icp.11.01.20.p22","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

本文阐述了拘留在刑事诉讼中的关键作用,并根据国内和国际法律标准和人权为其成功应用提供了指导。此外,还强调了实施其他措施以确保被告出庭和刑事案件成功的重要性(以下简称替代措施)。北马其顿司法机构对拘留问题的分析表明,下令和继续采取这一措施的决定存在重大缺陷,这表现在对法律依据的解释不充分。也就是说,结论是,这些解释是陈规定型的,非个体化的,包括重述《刑事诉讼法》的法律文本。不可避免的印象是,法官在评估应执行哪项措施时的做法往往以拘留开始和结束,而不是首先评估刑事诉讼法其他规定所提供的可能性,这些规定并不导致严格限制被告的自由,而是意味着施加禁令、限制或义务。北马其顿拘留领域所采用的做法在公开逮捕对象的情况下非常普遍。被拘留的实体从一开始就被认为是有罪的,并且被遗忘了他们是无辜的,直到证明不是这样。就新的刑事诉讼法而言,在决定拘留时强调了三个关键单位的存在,它们是:犯罪的主要怀疑,解释给予拘留的理由和解释为什么不执行任何替代措施。结合其他措施可以带来效果,但不幸的是,在北马其顿没有使用这种方法。最后,本文强调,在采取逮捕行为之前,必须有相关和具体的理由,不能有例外,不能强调媒体在逮捕行为中的夸大和滥用作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
DETENTION - ANALYSIS OF THE DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION (THEORY AND PRACTICE)
This paper elaborates the key role of detention in criminal proceedings and provides guidance for its successful application in accordance with the domestic and international legal standards and human rights. Furthermore, it emphasizes the importance of the implementation of other measures to ensure defendant’s presence and successful criminal case (hereinafter referred as alternative measures). The way in which analysis of detention is applied in North Macedonian judiciary, indicates significant deficiencies in decisions ordering and continuation of this measure expressed by inadequate explanations of the legal grounds. Namely, the conclusion is that the explanations are stereotyped, non-individualized and include a retelling of the legal text of the Law on Criminal Procedure. Inescapable impression is that the approach of judges when assessing which measure to be enforced, often begins and ends with detention, instead first evaluating the possibilities afforded by other provisions of the criminal procedural legislation and which do not lead to strictly limiting the freedom of the defendant, but they mean imposing injunctions, restrictions or obligations. The practice applied in the field of detention in North Macedonia is very common in the context of public arrests of subjects. Entities taken into custody are considered guilty since the beginning, and it is forgotten they are innocent until proven otherwise. In terms of the new law on criminal procedure, the presence of three key UNITS in deciding detention is highlighted, and those are: primary suspicion for committing a crime, explaining the grounds for granting custody and explaining why any alternative measures are not implemented. Combining alternative measures can bring results, but unfortunately in North Macedonia it is not used. Finally, this paper underlines that there must be relevant and specific 142 reasons before adoption of detention, and not making exceptions and emphasizing exaggerated and misused role of the media in the act of arresting.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信