Submitted by Edileide Reis (leyde-landy@hotmail.com) on 2013-04-11T19:20:49Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Faria Júnior.pdf: 1243418 bytes, checksum: c97a3d870c80517f1ea1e90781ee3766 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Rodrigo Meirelles(rodrigomei@ufba.br) on 2013-05-09T17:23:58Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Faria Júnior.pdf: 1243418 bytes, checksum: c97a3d870c80517f1ea1e90781ee3766 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2013-05-09T17:23:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Faria Júnior.pdf: 1243418 bytes, checksum: c97a3d870c80517f1ea1e90781ee3766 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010 / A partir da analise crítica do direito penal do inimigo tal como concebido por Jakobs, destinado aos que deliberadamente por principio e de forma reiterada violam as normas do contrato social chega-se ao processo penal do inimigo o qual nao mereceu tratamento distintivo na tese do citado autor tedesco mas pode ser identificado quando ele propoe a flexibilizaçao ou supressao de garantias processuais. A existencia do processo penal do inimigo que ficou mais nitida em nivel mundial com o recrudescimento do sistema penal após o atentado terrorista às Torres Gêmeas do World Trade Center em Nova Iorque ocorrido no dia 11 de setembro de 2001 afigura-se ainda mais deletéria do que a do "Direito Penal do Inimigo". Não se nega aqui a ocorrência de uma relação instrumental e de uma complementariedade funcional entre o Direito Penal e o Processo Penal constituindo-se o processo como um meio de se atingir os fins previstos no direito material. Todavia, com o fenômeno da "Constitucionalização do Direito" o processo penal para além da realização do direito penal há de ser compreendido como mecanismo de materialização dos direitos e garantias fundamentais reafirmando-se sua instrumentalidade mas agora sob o viés constitucional. Neste prisma à luz do principio da supremacia da Constituição não se pode admitir sob qualquer argumento um "Processo Penal do Inimigo" no qual prevalece a supressão de garantias processuais num modelo de Estado Democrático e de Direito edificado com base no principio da dignidade da pessoa humana. Dessa forma mesmo considerando que os direitos e garantias fundamentais não são absolutos e que a colisão entre eles é bastante comum em um texto constitucional repudia-se a recorrente manipulação do principio da proporcionalidade como forma de atingir a máxima restrição desses direitos. Não obstante não se tenha no Brasil um inimigo específico claramente segmentado e determinado, não se pode olvidar que a escolha dos "inimigos de ocasião" obedece não somente à lógica do linchamento, mas, sobretudo à lógica do linchamento, mas sobretudo à lógica dos detentores do poder. Apresenta-se por fim no panorama nacional, conforme analiticamente comprovado a triste realidade própria de um país de democracia tardia de um precedente uma exceção aos valores e garantias constitucionais tornando-se arbitrariamente regra geral, contaminando o Processo Penal do Cidadão. De sorte que, onquanto não se possa afirmar a existência de um Processo Penal do Inimigo no Brasil também não se pode dizer que exista o que aqui se denominou Processo Penal do Cidadão. Afinal num Estado Democrático de Direito não se pode admitir a existência de ïnimigo" ou "amigo" mas somente a de "culpado" ou "inocente" não se reconhecendo por conseguinte o Processo Penal do Inimigo como Direito. Portanto esse trabalho representa em síntese uma defesa veemente do Direito Processual Penal que só pode ser assim concebido como Constitucional e do Cidadão. / Salvador

Public, Constitutional and International Law / LL. M.

In this thesis, the common law crime of obstructing or defeating the course of justice as currently applied in South African law, is considered critically. The purpose of the study is to determine whether the ambit of the crime should be extended to target all conduct which undermines the proper administration of justice in South Africa. The interests protected by the crime are investigated, and those important constitutional values which underpin the crime, are identified. These values are: (i) constitutional supremacy (ii) the rule of law (iii) the doctrine of separation of powers, and (iv) the independence of the courts. In a post-constitutional era, the question raised is whether the crime as developed in the common law adequately protects these important democratic values. The historical background and development of the offence are discussed. This is followed by a comparative legal study which considers the existence and ambit of the offence in certain foreign jurisdictions. The foreign legal systems considered are England, Australia, Canada and the United States of America. The study reveals that the crime has been codified in most of these jurisdictions. Codification was driven by the need for legal certainty and compliance with constitutional imperatives. The study concludes that similar reform is necessary in South African criminal law. It is recommended that the common law offence of obstructing or defeating the course of justice be repealed and replaced with a comprehensive statutory offence which criminalises all manifestations of conduct which are intended to defeat or obstruct the proper administration of justice. The proposals are based upon the identified constitutional imperatives which underpin the crime. It is argued that the legislature is the proper institution to initiate reform in this regard. Detailed recommendations are made, which include draft legislation. / Law / LL.D.

Text in Afrikaans / Wanneer die konstitusionele invloed op borgstelling in die bree bespreek word, moet die bepalings van die Grondwet 200 van 1993 met inbegrip van die Handves van Menseregte en die onderliggende waardes, beginsels en doelstellings daartoe binne die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks inaggeneem word. Die algemene transformasie van die Suid-Afrikaanse gemeenskap in 'n verteenwoordigende demokrasie, veelvolkigheid van die Suid-Afrikaanse gemeenskap, eskalerende misdaadsyfer, wantroue van die gemeenskap in die regstelsel en die beklemtoning van fundamentele regte is aspekte wat figureer binne die Suid-Afrikaanse borgtogreg. Die tradisionele benadering dat die bewyslas op die beskuldigde rus tydens borgtogverrigtinge is binne die moderne borgtogreg en in die lig van die Grondwet 200 van 1993 asook die Tweede Strafproseswysigingswet 75 van 1995 onvanpas. As algemene reel behoort die bewyslas by 'n borgaansoek op die staat te rus op oorwig van waarskynlikhede. In sekere spesifiek omskrewe gevalle soos vervat inartikel60(11) van die Tweede Strafproseswysigingswet rus die bewyslas op die beskuldigde. Hierdie beperking is regverdigbaar in tenne van artike133 van die Grondwet 200 van 1993. Daar bestaan verder nie voldoende rede om nie gebruik te maak van die bewyslasbegrip as gevestigde prosessuele maatreel tydens borgverrigtinge nie. In die moderne Suid-Afrikaanse borgtogreg moet 'n balans gehandhaaf word tussen die belange van die gemeenskap en die fundamentele regte van die individu. Die howe moet in elke spesifieke geval· inhoud aan hierdie beginsel verleen. / When the effect of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 200 of 1993 on bail is considered, the transformation of the South African community, multi-racial society, high crimerate, disillusionment of the community with regard to the courtsystem and importance of fundamental rights must be regarded. The traditional approach that the onus is upon the accused (in his capacity as applicant) to prove on a balance of probability that the court should exercise its discretion in favour of granting bail and, in discharging this burden, he must show that the interests of justice will not be prejudiced, is in terms ofthe Constitution 200 of 1993 and the Criminal Procedure Second Amendment Act 75 of 1995 unacceptable. It is submitted that the onus should be on the State to place grounds before the Court why there should be an exercise of discretion in favour of the State for further detention of the individual. In terms of certain spesific crimes as described in article 60(11) of the Criminal Procedure Second Amendment Act theis placed on the accused. This exception is acceptable as it prescribes to the requirements in article 33 of the Constitution 200 of 1993. It is submitted that there is no reason why onus as excepted evidentiary rule should not be used in bail applications. A balance between the interest of the community and fundamental rights of the individual must be kept in modern law regarding bail. It is in the hands of the courts to substantiate this balance. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Criminal & Procedural Law)

O objetivo desta tese é demonstrar como se pode alcançar, na cooperação jurídica internacional, o respeito ao devido processo legal, ao mesmo tempo em que sejam respeitados os ordenamentos jurídicos envolvidos. Pluralidade de ordenamentos, confiança mútua, respeito aos direitos fundamentais e o dever/necessidade de cooperar conduzem a aparentes dicotomias na apreciação da matéria, como aquela que contrapõe eficiência e garantismo. Contextualizada a cooperação e analisadas suas principais caraterísticas, afirmamos que cooperação eficaz, reconhecimento da diversidade de sistemas jurídicos e direitos dos concernidos constituem os principais vetores do instituto, cujo equilíbrio é essencial a sua correta aplicação. Partindo desta premissa, a cooperação não pode ser entendida como instrumento dedicado primordialmente ao uso da acusação, como mais uma ferramenta de combate ao crime, mas como procedimento que tem por finalidade a consecução de um processo justo. Para problematizar a forma com a qual seria garantido este processo justo, parte-se do estudo da relação bilateral entre Brasil e Estados Unidos, que congrega os principais desafios a uma cooperação embasada no respeito aos direitos fundamentais, que deve permear todos os ramos do direito e, em especial, no respeito aos direitos da defesa, que são os mais atingidos na prática deste instituto. Analisa-se também o sistema estadunidense de cooperação jurídica internacional, com ênfase em sua legislação e jurisprudência sobre o tema. Esta análise é oportuna, pois a atuação dos Estados Unidos na área é bastante intensa e sua disciplina exaustiva, constituindo o estudo do direito comparado vantajoso à tentativa de propositura de soluções a questões não resolvidas no ordenamento brasileiro, cuja carência de regulamentação conduz a incertezas. Estas incidem principalmente na salvaguarda dos direitos da defesa, alijada do processo de desenvolvimento do instituto e excluída da utilização do MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) e da possibilidade de interferir no deslinde da execução de um pedido de assistência. Uma vez identificados pontualmente os principais problemas, prosseguimos com a apresentação de soluções gerais, consubstanciadas em propostas de interpretação de nossa legislação. Em síntese, estas propostas são direcionadas à proteção da ampla defesa, demonstrando-se a necessidade de disponibilizar meios adequados de atuação à defesa que, em homenagem ao corolário da paridade de armas, devem ser proporcionais aos meios que possui a acusação. Além disso, a defesa deve ter a oportunidade de se manifestar em todos os momentos do cumprimento do pedido de cooperação, não devendo se constituir em regra o contraditório diferido. Por fim, as sugestões voltar-se-ão ao papel que as tradicionais causas de restrição à assistência podem desempenhar na salvaguarda dos direitos aqui estudados. / The goal of this thesis is to demonstrate how the respect to the due process of law can be achieved at the same time that the legal systems involved are respected on an international legal cooperation. The plurality of jurisdictions, mutual confidence, respect for fundamental rights and duty/need to cooperate lead to apparent dichotomies when evaluating the matter, such as the one that contrasts efficiency and guaranteeism. However, when contextualizing the cooperation and analyzing its main features, we affirm that the effective cooperation, recognition of the diversity of legal systems and the rights of those concerned are the main vectors of the institute, whose balance is essential to its correct application. Starting from this premise, cooperation cannot be understood as an instrument dedicated primarily to the use of the prosecution as another crime-fighting tool, but rather as a procedure whose purpose is to achieve a fair trial. To discuss the way in which this fair trial would be guaranteed, we start by studying the bilateral relations between Brazil and United States, which brings together the main challenges to a cooperation based on the respect for fundamental rights, which must permeate all branches of law, and, in particular, the respect to the rights of the defense, which are the ones hit the hardest in the practice of this institute. Then, the American system of international legal cooperation will be also analyzed with an emphasis on its legislation and jurisprudence on the subject. This analysis is timely, as the performance of the United States in the area is quite intense and its discipline is exhaustive, which makes the study of the comparative law beneficial to the attempt at propositioning solutions to unresolved issues in the Brazilian system, whose lack of regulation leads to uncertainty. These mainly focus on safeguarding the rights of the defense, jettisoned from the development process of the institute and excluded from the use of MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) and from the possibility of interfering in the outcome of the execution of a request for assistance. After promptly identifying the main problems, we proceed with the presentation of general solutions embodied in proposals for interpretation and amendment of our legislation. In summary, these proposals are directed to the protection of being heard, which demonstrate the need of making available appropriate means of action to the defense that should be proportional to the means that the prosecution has in honor of the corollary of parity of weapons. In addition, the defense should have the opportunity to manifest itself at all times of the execution of the request for cooperation and the deferred adversary proceeding should not become the rule. Finally, the suggestions will return to the role that the traditional causes of restriction to the assistance can play when safeguarding the rights studied herein.

Mental illness that affects an accused’s fitness to stand trial is an ill-explored topic in the South African criminal justice system. The necessity to explore this topic is motivated by the increasing number of persons with mental illness moving into the criminal justice systems in South Africa, Canada, and the United States of America. An accused’s fitness to stand trial is assessed once concern about his ability to follow the proceedings, or give proper instructions to his legal representative, is in doubt. The assessment is conducted in the forensic system where the vastly different fields of law and psychiatry meet. The South African forensic system is plagued with resources and skills shortages. These inadequacies cause delays in resolving pre-trial issues for an accused in respect of whom fitness is at issue. The accused is oftentimes detained in a correctional facility awaiting fitness assessment for anything between three months to two years. Generally, detention in a correctional facility has a negative effect on the mental state of a person with a mental illness. The logistics of fitness assessments differ between the three jurisdictions referred to above. However, the threshold for fitness in these jurisdictions is relatively low, with the result that the majority of accused persons sent for fitness assessments are found fit to stand trial. Such a finding does not imply that the accused is not mentally ill; it simply means that the illness does not affect his understanding of the court proceedings and that it does not influence his ability to communicate with his legal representative. An accused with a serious mental illness such as schizophrenia or major depression can, for example, be found fit to stand trial. After a fitness assessment, a court may either find an accused fit to stand trial or unfit to stand trial. The fact that many persons found fit to stand trial have a mental illness suggests that there is a third category on the fitness continuum that must be acknowledged, namely, fit but mentally ill accused persons. No alternatives to traditional prosecution currently exist in South Africa for this third group of accused persons despite the fact that their situation in the criminal justice system calls for a therapeutic response. The South African legislative framework that regulates fitness assessments and the processes associated therewith are not without challenges. The assessment practices have recently been under scrutiny by the Constitutional court, which judgment changed the position for the accused found unfit to stand trial. The position of the fit but mentally ill accused remains unregulated. The Canadian and American criminal justice systems have implemented diversion programmes for fit but mentally ill accused persons in the form of Mental Health Courts. The underlying principle of a Mental Health Court is therapeutic jurisprudence. Therapeutic jurisprudence evaluates the impact of the law on those in conflict with it. It promotes the inclusion of expertise from other disciplines to improve the effectiveness of the law in a particular set of circumstances. Many South African scholars acknowledge the need for mental health expertise in the criminal justice system, and suggestions have been made for the diversion of mentally ill accused persons charged with minor offences. Those above notwithstanding, no formal diversion programmes exist in South Africa for the fit but mentally ill accused. This research investigates the Mental Health Court as a therapeutic response to the mentally ill accused in the South African criminal justice system. The Mental Health Court models as employed in Canada and the United States of America are studied to identify elements thereof that can be employed in the South African context to provide an effective alternative to traditional prosecution for the mentally ill accused. The Toronto Mental Health Court is studied in the Canadian context as a court that is not a diversion programme as such but has a diversion component attached to it. Diversion in Canada is reserved for those charged with less serious offences, and only these accused persons are allowed into the diversion component of the Mental Health Court. However, the Canadian Mental Health Court assists those who do not qualify for diversion but who need the specialised skills of the Mental Health Court for purposes of, for example, a bail application. The Brooklyn Mental Health Court in the United States of America is investigated as a model that constitutes a complete diversion programme and considers diversion of accused persons charged with more serious offences. The unique structure and procedure of each of these Mental Health Courts are investigated with due consideration to the eligibility criteria of each and the sanctions employed for non-compliance of the court-monitored treatment programmes. Further, the successes and challenges of each model are highlighted. Finally, a proposal is made for a Mental Health Court model mindful of the uniquely South African factors that have to be taken into account when building such a model. Amendments to the existing legislative framework are proposed to incorporate a Mental Health Court as a therapeutic response to mentally ill accused persons in the South African criminal justice system. / Criminal and Procedural Law

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

In Sweden an oral hearing, the trial, is held as the ideal model for the criminal procedure and according to the legality principle reported crimes ought to be investigated and prosecuted. Over time high levels of reported crimes have led to an increase in pressure on the courts and other actors in the criminal process. This pressure has created new ways of dealing with reported crimes in summary procedures and to exceptions from the legality principle. Such changes have given the prosecutor a key role in deciding how cases are dealt with in the criminal process.  The purpose of this thesis is to examine the Swedish public prosecutor’s influence on the choice of cases that are investigated, prosecuted and tried in court during a trial. The study examines the prosecutors’ legal authority and how that authority has changed from the time that the Code of Judicial Procedure came into force in 1948 to the beginning of 2011. A starting point for the examination is that investigating, prosecuting and trying cases in the criminal process should be carried out in a way that is considered to be fair according to societal values, which are embedded in the legal system. Both decisions about which cases will be tried and the procedure involved in how to try them has to be performed in a way that seems to be fair. In the study the values that underlie the criminal process is examined through a model. This model assumes that the criminal process has been created and developed to satisfy different requirements, which can be separated into three main groups: the functions of the criminal process, legal principles and the main objectives of a good administration of justice. The model is used to analyze and discuss the development of the legal rules. The prosecutor’s authority and influence over the process has broadened and the use of summary procedures has served to place the focus on the police investigation instead of the trial. Among the objectives of a good administration of justice Speed and Cost effectiveness are considered to be more important than Security. As long as the Trust in the system is sufficient this development can continue. A conclusion from the study is that there is a need for some actor to prioritize and to do that openly. In the study the issue is raised whether it is time to question the legality principle as the main principle for the Swedish legal system. / <p>Förlagsutgiven med 3 månaders embargo.</p>

Le 21ème siècle est marqué par une évolution technologique et scientifique de très haut niveau qui permet d'accomplir toutes les investigations techniques et scientifiques pour tous les domaines de la science. Les Magistrats ont recours, dans le cadre des investigations nécessaires à la manifestation de la vérité, à des hommes de l'art. L'expert judiciaire algérien, comme toute autre expert, obéit aux principes universels inhérents à la protection et sauvegarde des libertés fondamentales et surtout à l'éthique. L'expertise, quant à elle, doit impérativement obéir aux lois et règlements qui nous gouvernent dont le résultat obtenu ne doit souffrir d'aucune irrégularité et doit être opposable aux tiers pour emporter la conviction des juges. / The 21st century is marked by a very high level of technological improvements and scientific, allowing to perform all technical and scientific investigations in all science's areas. The judges are used, in the context of investigations necessary for the truth's manifestation to art's men. Algérian judicial expert, like any other expert, obeys universal principles inherent in the protection and safeguarding of fundamental freedoms and especially ethics. Expertise, about it, must imperatively obey the laws and regulations who govern us that the result should not suffer any irregularity and shall be binding on third parties to carry conviction of judges.

Thesis deals with media objectivity on the example of four Czech newspapers. Thesis in its theoretical part focuses on definition of media, journalist's role and their job which is influenced by many factors, socio-cultural context in which news production is implemented, outlines concept of media objectivity and describes media image of crime. Another part of thesis explains the terms concerning criminal procedure, qualifies rights and duties of criminal justice and a suspect person and finally concentrates on providing with information about offence by media and difficulties which can be appeared. Practical part of the thesis analyzes media objectivity through qualitative analysis of articles. Articles were chosen from four Czech newspapers (Aha!, Blesk, Mladá fronta Dnes, Právo) and two time periods: October-November 2010 and March-April 2011. Research question asks: Did chosen newspapers inform about a murder of Anna Janatková in an objective way? Objective way of informing is examined in relation to rights and duties of suspect and to protection of victims.