大流行时期的刑事诉讼

Manfred Dauster
{"title":"大流行时期的刑事诉讼","authors":"Manfred Dauster","doi":"10.22364/iscflul.8.2.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"COVID-19 caught humanity off guard at the turn of 2019/2020. Even when the Chinese government sealed off Wuhan, a city of millions, for weeks to contain the epidemic, no one in other parts of the world had any idea of what specifically was heading for the countries. The ignorant and belittling public statements and tweets of the former US president are still fresh in everyone's memory. Only when the Italian army carried the coffins with the COVID-19 victims in northern Italy, the gravesites spread in the Bergamo region, as well as the intensive care beds filled in the overcrowded hospitals, the countries of the European Union and other parts of the world realised how serious the situation threatened to become. Together with the World Health Organisation (WHO), the terms changed to pandemic. Much of the pandemic evoked reminiscences originating in the Black Death raging between 1346 and 1353 or in the Spanish flu after the First World War. Meanwhile, life went on. The administration of justice in criminal cases could not and should not come to a standstill. Emergency measures, such as those that began to emerge in February 2020, are always the hour of the executive. In their efforts to stop the spread of the virus, in Germany, governments particularly reflected on criminal proceedings. Neither criminal procedural law nor the courts and court administrations applying this procedural law were adequately prepared for the challenges. Deadlines threatened to expire, access to court buildings and halls had to be restricted to reduce the risk of infection, public hearings represented a potential source of infection for both the parties to the proceedings and the public, virtual criminal hearings via conference calls had not yet been tested in civil proceedings, but were legally possible, but not so in criminal cases. The taking of evidence in criminal cases in Germany is governed by the rules of strict evidence and is largely not at the disposal of the parties to the proceedings. Especially in criminal cases, fundamental and human rights guarantees serve to protect the accused, but also the victims and witnesses. Executive measures of pandemic containment might impact these guarantees. Here, an attempt will be made to discuss at some neuralgic points how Germany has attempted to balance the resulting contradictory interests in the conflict between pandemic control and constitutional requirements for criminal court proceedings.","PeriodicalId":314457,"journal":{"name":"New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives. II","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Criminal Proceedings in Times of Pandemic\",\"authors\":\"Manfred Dauster\",\"doi\":\"10.22364/iscflul.8.2.18\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"COVID-19 caught humanity off guard at the turn of 2019/2020. Even when the Chinese government sealed off Wuhan, a city of millions, for weeks to contain the epidemic, no one in other parts of the world had any idea of what specifically was heading for the countries. The ignorant and belittling public statements and tweets of the former US president are still fresh in everyone's memory. Only when the Italian army carried the coffins with the COVID-19 victims in northern Italy, the gravesites spread in the Bergamo region, as well as the intensive care beds filled in the overcrowded hospitals, the countries of the European Union and other parts of the world realised how serious the situation threatened to become. Together with the World Health Organisation (WHO), the terms changed to pandemic. Much of the pandemic evoked reminiscences originating in the Black Death raging between 1346 and 1353 or in the Spanish flu after the First World War. Meanwhile, life went on. The administration of justice in criminal cases could not and should not come to a standstill. Emergency measures, such as those that began to emerge in February 2020, are always the hour of the executive. In their efforts to stop the spread of the virus, in Germany, governments particularly reflected on criminal proceedings. Neither criminal procedural law nor the courts and court administrations applying this procedural law were adequately prepared for the challenges. Deadlines threatened to expire, access to court buildings and halls had to be restricted to reduce the risk of infection, public hearings represented a potential source of infection for both the parties to the proceedings and the public, virtual criminal hearings via conference calls had not yet been tested in civil proceedings, but were legally possible, but not so in criminal cases. The taking of evidence in criminal cases in Germany is governed by the rules of strict evidence and is largely not at the disposal of the parties to the proceedings. Especially in criminal cases, fundamental and human rights guarantees serve to protect the accused, but also the victims and witnesses. Executive measures of pandemic containment might impact these guarantees. Here, an attempt will be made to discuss at some neuralgic points how Germany has attempted to balance the resulting contradictory interests in the conflict between pandemic control and constitutional requirements for criminal court proceedings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":314457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives. II\",\"volume\":\"1 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\":\"New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives. II\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22364/iscflul.8.2.18\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives. II","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22364/iscflul.8.2.18","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

2019/2020年伊始,COVID-19让人类措手不及。即使当中国政府封锁了拥有数百万人口的城市武汉数周以控制疫情时,世界其他地区的人也不知道哪些病毒会流向这些国家。美国前总统的无知和贬低的公开声明和推特仍然记忆犹新。只有当意大利军队在意大利北部运送COVID-19受害者的棺材时,墓地在贝加莫地区蔓延,以及人满为患的医院里挤满了重症监护病床时,欧盟国家和世界其他地区才意识到局势可能变得多么严重。与世界卫生组织(WHO)一起,术语改为大流行。这场大流行在很大程度上唤起了人们对1346年至1353年间肆虐的黑死病或一战后西班牙流感的回忆。与此同时,生活还在继续。刑事案件的司法不能也不应该停滞不前。紧急措施,如2020年2月开始出现的措施,总是行政部门的时间。在阻止病毒传播的努力中,德国政府特别关注刑事诉讼。刑事诉讼法以及适用这一诉讼法的法院和法院行政部门都没有为这些挑战做好充分准备。最后期限即将到期,必须限制进入法院大楼和大厅以减少感染风险,公开听证会对诉讼双方和公众都是潜在的感染源,通过电话会议进行的虚拟刑事听证会尚未在民事诉讼中进行测试,但在法律上是可能的,但在刑事案件中则不是这样。在德国,刑事案件的证据采集受严格证据规则的约束,基本上不受诉讼各方的支配。特别是在刑事案件中,基本人权保障不仅有助于保护被告,也有助于保护受害者和证人。流行病控制的行政措施可能会影响这些保证。在此,我将试图讨论一些令人头疼的问题,即德国如何试图在流行病控制与刑事法院诉讼的宪法要求之间的冲突中平衡由此产生的相互矛盾的利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Criminal Proceedings in Times of Pandemic
COVID-19 caught humanity off guard at the turn of 2019/2020. Even when the Chinese government sealed off Wuhan, a city of millions, for weeks to contain the epidemic, no one in other parts of the world had any idea of what specifically was heading for the countries. The ignorant and belittling public statements and tweets of the former US president are still fresh in everyone's memory. Only when the Italian army carried the coffins with the COVID-19 victims in northern Italy, the gravesites spread in the Bergamo region, as well as the intensive care beds filled in the overcrowded hospitals, the countries of the European Union and other parts of the world realised how serious the situation threatened to become. Together with the World Health Organisation (WHO), the terms changed to pandemic. Much of the pandemic evoked reminiscences originating in the Black Death raging between 1346 and 1353 or in the Spanish flu after the First World War. Meanwhile, life went on. The administration of justice in criminal cases could not and should not come to a standstill. Emergency measures, such as those that began to emerge in February 2020, are always the hour of the executive. In their efforts to stop the spread of the virus, in Germany, governments particularly reflected on criminal proceedings. Neither criminal procedural law nor the courts and court administrations applying this procedural law were adequately prepared for the challenges. Deadlines threatened to expire, access to court buildings and halls had to be restricted to reduce the risk of infection, public hearings represented a potential source of infection for both the parties to the proceedings and the public, virtual criminal hearings via conference calls had not yet been tested in civil proceedings, but were legally possible, but not so in criminal cases. The taking of evidence in criminal cases in Germany is governed by the rules of strict evidence and is largely not at the disposal of the parties to the proceedings. Especially in criminal cases, fundamental and human rights guarantees serve to protect the accused, but also the victims and witnesses. Executive measures of pandemic containment might impact these guarantees. Here, an attempt will be made to discuss at some neuralgic points how Germany has attempted to balance the resulting contradictory interests in the conflict between pandemic control and constitutional requirements for criminal court proceedings.
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