The Right Of The Injured Parties To Represent Themselves Instead Of Being Represented By A Prosecutor In The Criminal Procedure Code Of Hungary
AbstractSince the general spreading of the institutions of Roman law, one can notice an interaction between the national legislations, which has become more and more intensive during the evolution of European law, especially since the 18th century. And since the birth of the European Union, the significance of getting to know each other’s legal systems got a new dimension for the jurists of the Member States, regardless of the degree of autonomy of national legislation. This applies to penal law as well, the regulation of which is still under the scope of national authority. Hereafter, in the spirit of this, I would like to take part in the presentation of the Hungarian law of criminal procedure by shortly introducing its unique institution, the substitute private prosecution. The significance of this legal institute is that it can be considered as a special solution for the question of controlling the activities of prosecution, which has been raised even in the recommendation of the Council of Europe (Reccomendation No. 2000/19.). According to this, one should provide, on the one hand, the organizational conditions for the revision of the negative decisions of the prosecution, on the other, a chance of appeal to the court in case the revision ends up with no results. There are different solutions for this in every country, for example, in the German criminal procedure, the institution of the “Klageerzwingungsverfahren,” which enables the court to oblige the prosecutor to indict after a plea from the injured. And the traditional Hungarian solution for this is the substitute private prosecution.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Petru Maior University, Faculty of Economics Law and Administrative Sciences and Pro Iure Foundation in its journal Curentul Juridic, The Juridical Current.
Volume (Year): 45 (2011)
Issue (Month): (June)
criminal procedure; prosecution; private prosecution;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- K00 - Law and Economics - - General - - - General (including Data Sources and Description)
- K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bogdan Voaidas).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.