The Content of the Right to Repairs for Judicial Errors in Criminal Proceedings - Jurisprudential Influences (National and European)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18662/lumenlaw/10.2/73Keywords:
judicial errors, criminal process, right to compensationAbstract
This article aims to analyze the content of the right to redress for miscarriages of justice in criminal trials, under the influence of national and European jurisprudence. In this sense, we will formulate a comparative historical analysis, starting from the Code of Criminal Procedure Carol I, going through the provisions of the old Code of Criminal Procedure and finally stopping at the provisions of the current Code of Criminal Procedure. The purpose of this comparative-historical approach is to analyze the evolution of jurisprudence and internal doctrine under the impact of human rights theories. A considerable role in our analysis is represented by the jurisprudence of the ECtHR, which had a particular impact on the perception of the Romanian legislator regarding the content of the right to compensation for judicial errors that occur in criminal trials.
References
Apostu, I. (2016). Feminine resources of power. Cross-Cultural Management Journal, XVIII(02), 133-138.
Apostu, I., Iacob, C. A., & Iordache, M. A. (2017). Stabilitate şi conflict în cuplul contemporan [Stability and conflict in the contemporary couple]. Lumen.
Constitutional Court. (1998). Decision no. 45/1998. https://www.ccr.ro/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/D045_98.pdf
Council of Europe. (1950). European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf
Council of Europe. (1984). Protocol no. 7 to the European Convention on Human Rights. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Library_Collection_P7postP11_ETS117E_ENG.pdf
Damian, S., Sandu, A., Necula, R., Bizgan, M., & Ioan, B. (2013). Death in the vision of doctors. An anthropological perspective. Postmodern Openings, 4(3), 73-97. https://postmodernopenings.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/5-Death-in-the-vision2.pdf
Dongoroz, V. (1976). Explicaţii teoretice ale Codului de procedură penală român [Theoretical explanations of the Romanian Criminal Procedure Code]. (2nd vol.). Academiei.
Drăguţ, E. (2005). Repararea pagubei materiale sau a daunei morale în cazul condamnării pe nedrept sau al privării ori restrângerii de libertate în mod nelegal [Reparation of material damage or moral damage in case of wrongful conviction or illegal deprivation or restriction of liberty]. Dreptul, 4, 230 – 204.
European Court of Human Rights. (1996). Chahal c. United Kingdom. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22fulltext%22:[%22Chahal%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-58004%22]}
European Court of Human Rights. (1997). Lukanov c. Bulgaria. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library=ECHR&id=001-58022&filename=001-58022.pdf&TID=thkbhnilzk
Florea, D. N. (2017). Drept internaţional public [Public international law]. Lumen.
Florea, D., Galeş, N., & Terec-Vlad, L. (2019). The premise of the Establishment of the International Criminal Court. European Journal of Law and Public Administration, 6(2), 213-222. Retrieved from https://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/ejlpa/article/view/2344
High Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ). (2004). Decision no. 1256/2004. https://legeaz.net/spete-drept-comercial-iccj-2004/decizia-1256-2004
High Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ). (2005a). Decision no. 8638/2005. https://legeaz.net/spete-civil-iccj-2005/decizia-8638-2005
High Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ). (2005b). Decision no. 2885/2005. https://legeaz.net/spete-contencios-inalta-curte-iccj-2005/decizia-2885-2005
Huidu, A. (2018). Social Acceptance of Ethically Controversed Innovative Techniques Related to or Derived from Assisted Reproductive Technologies – A Review of Literature. Eastern European Journal of Medical Humanities and Bioethics, 2(2), 1-14. doi: https://doi.org/10.18662/eejmhb/11
Huidu, A. (2019). The need for specific and unitary regulations regarding techniques in connection to or derived from medically assisted human reproduction in Romania. Logos Universality Mentality Education Novelty: Law, 6(2), 14-25. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18662/lumenlaw/09
Paraschiv, C. S., & Damaschin, M. (2004). Drept procesual penal [Criminal procedural law]. Lumina Lex.
Petre, I. (2005). Consideraţii în legătură cu răspunderea patrimonială a statului şi a judecătorilor şi procurorilor pentru erori judiciare, în lumina dispoziţiilor constituţionale şi legale [Considerations regarding the patrimonial liability of the state and judges and prosecutors for judicial errors, in the light of constitutional and legal provisions]. Dreptul, 9, 97 – 106.
Romanian Parliament. (1936). The Criminal Procedure Code. Monitorul Oficial, 66, March 19th 1936.
Romanian Parliament. (1968). The Criminal Procedure Code. Buletinul Oficial, 145, November 12th 1968.
Romanian Parliament. (1990). Legea nr. 32/1990 pentru modificarea şi completarea unor dispoziţii ale Codului de procedură penală [Law no. 32/1990 for the modification and completion of some provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code]. Monitorul Oficial al României, 128, November 17th 1990.
Romanian Parliament. (2003). Legea nr. 281/2003 privind modificarea şi completarea Codului de procedura penală şi a unor legi speciale [Law no. 281/2003 regarding the amendment and completion of the Criminal Procedure Code and some special laws]. Monitorul Oficial al României, 468, July 1st 2003.
Romanian Parliament. (2003). Romanian Constitution. Monitorul Oficial al României, 758, October 29th 2003.
Romanian Parliament. (2009). Legea nr. 287/2009 privind Codul civil. Monitorul Oficial al României, 511, July 24th 2009.
Romanian Parliament. (2010). The Criminal Procedure Code. Monitorul Oficial al României, 486, July 15th 2010.
Sandu, A., Necula, R., & Damian, S. (2017). A qualitative inquiry in social construction of chronic illness. Case study on diabetes mellitus. 4th Central and Eastern European LUMEN International Scientific Conference on Education, Sport and Health 2017, 224-227. https://ibn.idsi.md/vizualizare_articol/69934
Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). (1991). Decision no. 56/1991. Dreptul, 1, 109.
Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). (1993). Decision no. 211/1992. Dreptul, 7, 96.
Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). (2003a). Decision no. 246/2003. https://legeaz.net/spete-penal-iccj-completul-de-9-judecatori/decizia-246-2003
Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). (2003b). Decision no. 232/2003. https://legeaz.net/spete-penal-iccj-completul-de-9-judecatori/decizia-232-2003
Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). (2003c). Decision no. 1019/2003. https://legeaz.net/spete-penal-csj-2003/decizia-1019-2003
Susman, M. (1998). Probleme ridicate în cazul erorilor judiciare [Issues raised in the case of miscarriages of justice]. Dreptul, 2, 71 – 74.
Terec-Vlad, L., & Trifu, A. (2014). The appreciative inquiry as a way of enhancing organization performance. The Yearbook of the ,,Gh. Zane” Institute of Economic Research, 23(2), 183-187. http://ices.ro/RePEc/zan/ygzier/2014/YGZIER_V23_ISS2_183to187.pdf
Theodoru, G. (1998). Drept procesual penal. Partea specială [Criminal procedural law. Special part] (2nd vol.). Cugetarea.
Tulbure, A. Ş. (2001). Despre necesitatea modificării prevederilor art. 504 din Codul de procedură penală referitor la repararea pagubei în cazul condamnării sau a luării unei măsuri preventive pe nedrept [About the need to change the provisions of art. 504 of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding compensation for damage in case of wrongful conviction or taking a preventive measure]. Dreptul, 6, 99 – 100.
Tulbure, A. Ş., & Tatu, A. M. (2001). Tratat de drept procesual penal [Treatise on criminal procedural law]. All Beck.
United Nations General Assembly. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 The Authors & LUMEN Publishing House
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant this journal right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work, with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g. post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as an earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
LUMEN Law Journal has an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs
CC BY-NC-ND
