Within this context, debates associated with human and civil rights often seem to descend into a zero-sum game where victims’ rights are seemingly only won at the expense of the rights of accusedpersons or prisoners (Williams 2005; Hall 2009). This binary positioning of perpetrators or prisoners versus victims is a powerful ideological move. It casts victims, and those accused or convicted of criminal conduct, as distinct, polarised opposites (Zedner 2004; Dignan 2005; Bednarova 2011). Further, by politicising the issue of victims’ versus ‘offenders’’ rights a clear delineation is drawn between those who are ‘deserving’ of legal protections and those who are not. Such delineations encourage narratives which construct the ‘criminal’ or the ‘prisoner’ as having actively forfeited their rights and are in keeping with discourses that define lawbreakers as ‘other’ (Drake 2012). Whilst such crude binary constructions have often appeared in media discourses in the wake of particularly violent or high-profile crimes, there has been an apparent increasing reliance on a zero-sum approach to victims’ and offenders’ rights in political rhetoric in Britain since the early 1990s (Sanders 2002).
This Handbook is concerned with early access to legal aid for those who are arrested, detained or suspected or accused of, or charged with, committing a crime. In adopt- ing this focus, the Handbook is intended neither to divert attention away from victims and witnesses, nor to undervalue the importance of providing appropriate legal aid for them. Rather, it is in recognition of the fact that the needs relating to legal services of suspects and accusedpersons on the one hand, and victims and witnesses on the other, are different. While both sets of needs must be taken into account and appropriately catered for, in the interests of justice and of a fair trial, the ways in which those needs are catered for differ, as do the mechanisms for delivering legal aid to those involved. Moreover, while restorative justice and other community-based approaches to dealing with crime may involve victims, witnesses and those suspected or accused of crime, it is generally inappropriate for a legal aid provider to provide legal services to both suspects/accusedpersons and victims/witnesses, given their different and sometimes conflicting needs. Increasingly there are more multidiscipli- nary approaches being adopted in relation to the provision of legal aid, which rec- ognize the multidimensional nature of problems people face, particularly people who have extremely limited resources and who are living at or below the margins of poverty. While this Handbook may not directly address some of these issues, it does recognize that the situation on the ground can often be quite complex and criminal cases may also have civil/family/administrative elements to them which require a comprehensive and holistic approach to legal aid.
In addition, and in accordance with Art. 6 (3) (c) CEDH, which operates as minimum standard in relation with the general right of defence, three different procedural rights should be here considered: first, the right to self-representation; second, the right to freely chosen legal assistance; and third, the right to obtain legal aid. First, although not expressed, the right of defend oneself in person should be allowed if it is also permitted under domestic law. 67 This would also include the possibility to waive the right to such legal assistance according to ECtHR jurisprudence. 68 Secondly, the right to a technical defence with a lawyer of one’s own choosing should also be assured, including, for instance, confidentiality of conversations between the accused and counsel. 69 Lastly, the right to free legal aid should be also contemplated with regard to the defendant’s economic situation in correspondence with the respective obligation on the part of the state. 70 Last but not least, a separate regulation for both rights – legal aid and legal advice – would be strongly recommended as much as they are completely different procedural safeguards. With such provision of legal aid as an independent right, a more extensive guarantee will take place covering not only the previous Measure 1, but also in relation to the free access to another professionals or services as they are generally provided in national legislation. 71
of criminal activities for which the affected person has been acquitted in a previous trial, or in other cases where the ne bis in idem principle applies. Third party confiscation is allowed only under specific conditions, that is where the acquiring third party paid an amount lower than market value and should have suspected that the assets are proceeds of crime, and after an assessment showing that confiscation of assets directly from the person who transferred them is unlikely to succeed. Finally, specific safeguards and judicial remedies are included in the proposal in order to ensure an equal level of protection and respect for fundamental rights. These include the right to be informed about the proceedings, the right to be represented by a lawyer, the obligation to communicate any decision affecting property as soon as possible and to have an effective possibility to appeal against such decision. These specific remedies are foreseen not only for accused or suspected person but also for other persons in the context of third party confiscation. The proposal is currently being discussed in the European Parliament..
The various legal prohibitions for the use of torture in Uzbekistan have now been clarified. It is now important to take a step back from purely Uzbekistani law in order to compare its actions with those of its neighbouring states, and also countries which, at first glance, would appear to be places where it would not be expected that torture would be in frequent use. These especially include fully Westernised European nations, most notably Germany and the UK in Part I, as well as Turkey, a state with a more complex history of torture. Additionally, a discussion of relevant ECtHR jurisprudence 95 is examined, and the diplomatic relations between the UK and Jordan are investigated, with torture being the focus of what transpired. Part II focuses more on French ECtHR case law, as well as an in-depth investigation of the then different laws (to the UK and most of Europe) on inhumane punishment in the Isle of Man which came to light in Tyrer v UK 96 in the 1970s.
of the Slovak Republic, there has been sold 99.91% of the total sold area. There was sold only 0.09% of the sold area to legalpersons from abroad in 2012 (Figure 1). The representation of the land sold in the monitored group of twelve districts showed, that the largest area of agricultural land sold to legalpersons from Slovakia was in the Topoľčany district, and it was 40.57% of the total sold area to legalpersons. Following in rank according to the land area sold to legalpersons from Slovakia were the Rimavská Sobota district, where there was sold 13.62% of the total land sold to legalpersons, and the Trnava district with the area that represented 13.59% of the total area of land sold to legal the Banská Bystrica district (0.11%). In the district Svidník, there has not been reported any sold area to legalpersons neither from Slovakia, nor from abroad. Agricultural land sold to foreign legalpersons featured in the Topoľčany district and the Žilina district. The area of agricultural land sold to foreign legalpersons in the Topoľčany district was 0.04% of the total sold area to legalpersons. In the Žilina district, it was a slightly higher land area, the volume of which was 0.05% of the total sold area to legalpersons. The comparison of the land sold to legalpersons from Slovakia and from abroad in two districts where there had been recorded the sale of land to foreign entities, showed that in the Topoľčany district , there was sold 99.89% of the land area to legalpersons from Slovakia and 0.11% area of agricultural land to foreign legalpersons. The area of the sold land to legalpersons from Slovakia was 96.58% in the Žilina district and 3.42% to legalpersons from abroad. Regarding the number of plots sold to legalpersons from Slovakia in 2012, there was sold 16 062 (99.62%) and the number of plots sold to legalpersons from
This topic immediately resonated within me as soon as my father explained, in the mid-2000s, that he had found my uncle Gordon K. Hirabayashi’s wartime diaries and correspondence in his personal files in Alberta, Canada. Gordon’s resistance had to do with his objections to the curfew against and removal of persons of Japanese ancestry in 1942; he refused to comply with both orders and was summarily tried, convicted, and sentenced for his transgressions. When my father invited me to work up a manuscript based on Gordon’s diaries and letters, I wondered what I would learn about Gordon’s overall state of mind when he was incarcerated between 1943 and 1945. 7 As I approached reading his wartime writing, I
The aforementioned study by Heydon (2005) begins with an analysis of the types of footing activated at different phases of the interview. With a focus on producer roles, she notes that the production of scripted utterances such as the reading of a suspect’s rights assigns the roles of principal and author to the police institution rather than the individual officer. This footing is often oriented to by participants, as is evident in such utterances as “I must inform you...”, which indicates that the officer is acting only in the role of animator, uttering the words because of legal requirements. This framework is most frequently activated during the ‘opening’ phase of an interview (cf. 1.1), which is characterised by a number of formulaic utterances scripted by the institution. During the ‘information gathering’ phase, Heydon observes the officers’ preference for suspects to be aligned as principal and author, as well as animator, of their own accounts, noting that it is institutionally preferable to have the account in the suspect’s ‘own words’. As she puts it, “the police interviewer would, ideally, be assigned none of these roles for the duration of the information gathering” (2005: 58). Evidence of officers’ preferences appears in the form of explicit promotion of the footing, such as ‘Would you care to tell me in your own words?’. Similarly, interviewing officers often work to maintain the footing by feigning ignorance of certain facts, “because they want the suspect to answer the question on record, as though the suspect is the owner of the ‘new’ information” (2005: 59). However, this is not always successful, and officers frequently find themselves having to ascribe the roles of principal and author to the police institution or eyewitnesses in order to elicit the required responses.
In In Re Winship, a majority of the Supreme Court dismissed an argument that criminal due process rights should not apply there because the proceedings, against a juvenile, were said to be protective and remedial rather than punitive. The majority considered the substance of the proceedings were criminal, despite the label. It has confirmed that anything that affects the penalty for a criminal offence must be proven at the standard of beyond reasonable doubt. 53 It has not permitted transfers of a legal burden of proof to the defence to show that a partial defence to the charge exists. 54 Sometimes, a distinction is drawn between presumptions that must be made, and presumptions that may be made. It ‘reasonably appropriate and adapted’ test of determining the constitutional validity of federal law: McCullough v Maryland (1819) 4 Wheat 316, 321 (Marshall CJ), applied in many Australian cases, including Commonwealth v Tasmania (1983) 158 CLR 1. On Australian due process, see Fiona Wheeler, ‘The Doctrine of Separation of Powers and Constitutionally Entrenched Due Process in Australia’ (1997) 23 Monash University Law Review 248, Michael McHugh, ‘Does Chapter III of the Constitution Protect Substantive as Well as Procedural Rights?’ (2001) 21 Australian Bar Review 235.
In this paper I am going to present the position of women and how crime against women take place. And how, in this era of globalization, criminal justice system & maintaining law and order. How women feel safe and secure from the crime like rape, abduction, kidnapping, Murder, eve-teasing and forcing wife/daughter-in-law to go for feticide. These are the issues which affect a large section of society even in Indian society where women occupies a vital position and venerable place whom Vedas glorified as the Mother, the creator, one who gives life and worshipped her as a ‘Devi; or Goddess. Women found herself totally suppres sed and subjugated in a patriarchal society. Indian women through the countries remained subjugated and oppressed because society believed in clinging on to orthodox beliefs for the burnt of violence, domestic as well as public, physical, emotional and men tal. In present, women are now to safe and always a kind of threat feelings generated among women that in the present scenario they can be easily victimized from any nook and corner of the society.