刑事诉讼中的抗辩式程序概念

Q4 Social Sciences
Vladimír Pelc
{"title":"刑事诉讼中的抗辩式程序概念","authors":"Vladimír Pelc","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with the issue of adversarialism in relation to Czech criminal proceedings. Although it is a frequently mentioned aspect of the criminal process, adversarialism has not yet been established in Czech criminal law scholarship in the broader professional discourse. Legal practice also treats this concept rather restrainedly and selects certain partial aspects of this problem. In the Czech environment, therefore, one cannot yet speak of a doctrine of adversarialism. It is questionable whether the new Criminal Procedure Code, if adopted, could change this, since it explicitly mentions adversarialism. The author is of the opinion that adversarialism is an immanent part of every criminal process, especially criminal proceedings before the court. He considers adversarialism to be a principle which he elaborates in a broader context than is usually stated. He sees the essence of adversarialism in the legitimate clash of allegations and legal opinions, not merely in the right to be informed of the substance of oneʼs accusation and the right to comment on such an accusation. He considers the audiatur et altera pars rule to be the very minimum and unbreakable guarantee of an adversarial finding of law.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Koncept kontradiktornosti v trestním řízení\",\"authors\":\"Vladimír Pelc\",\"doi\":\"10.14712/23366478.2023.23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article deals with the issue of adversarialism in relation to Czech criminal proceedings. Although it is a frequently mentioned aspect of the criminal process, adversarialism has not yet been established in Czech criminal law scholarship in the broader professional discourse. Legal practice also treats this concept rather restrainedly and selects certain partial aspects of this problem. In the Czech environment, therefore, one cannot yet speak of a doctrine of adversarialism. It is questionable whether the new Criminal Procedure Code, if adopted, could change this, since it explicitly mentions adversarialism. The author is of the opinion that adversarialism is an immanent part of every criminal process, especially criminal proceedings before the court. He considers adversarialism to be a principle which he elaborates in a broader context than is usually stated. He sees the essence of adversarialism in the legitimate clash of allegations and legal opinions, not merely in the right to be informed of the substance of oneʼs accusation and the right to comment on such an accusation. He considers the audiatur et altera pars rule to be the very minimum and unbreakable guarantee of an adversarial finding of law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

该条涉及捷克刑事诉讼中的对抗性问题。虽然它是一个经常被提及的刑事程序方面,对抗主义尚未建立在捷克刑法学术在更广泛的专业话语。法律实践也比较克制地对待这一概念,选取了这一问题的某些局部方面。因此,在捷克的环境中,人们还不能谈论对抗主义学说。新的《刑事诉讼法》如果通过,是否会改变这一点值得怀疑,因为它明确提到了对抗性。作者认为,对抗性是每一种刑事诉讼程序,特别是法院刑事诉讼程序的内在组成部分。他认为对抗主义是一个原则,他在一个比通常更广泛的背景下阐述。他认为,对抗性的本质在于指控和法律意见的合法冲突,而不仅仅在于被告知指控内容的权利和对这种指控发表评论的权利。他认为,“旁听和替代条款”规则是对抗性法律发现的最低限度和牢不可破的保证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Koncept kontradiktornosti v trestním řízení
The article deals with the issue of adversarialism in relation to Czech criminal proceedings. Although it is a frequently mentioned aspect of the criminal process, adversarialism has not yet been established in Czech criminal law scholarship in the broader professional discourse. Legal practice also treats this concept rather restrainedly and selects certain partial aspects of this problem. In the Czech environment, therefore, one cannot yet speak of a doctrine of adversarialism. It is questionable whether the new Criminal Procedure Code, if adopted, could change this, since it explicitly mentions adversarialism. The author is of the opinion that adversarialism is an immanent part of every criminal process, especially criminal proceedings before the court. He considers adversarialism to be a principle which he elaborates in a broader context than is usually stated. He sees the essence of adversarialism in the legitimate clash of allegations and legal opinions, not merely in the right to be informed of the substance of oneʼs accusation and the right to comment on such an accusation. He considers the audiatur et altera pars rule to be the very minimum and unbreakable guarantee of an adversarial finding of law.
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
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
25 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