PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES IN CRIMINAL TRIAL - MATTERS REGARDING THE PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTANTIVE TIME-LIMITS
Given that the judicial practice is non-unified with respect to the time-limit in which the precautionary measure ordered in criminal cases must be verified, I consider it appropriate to analyse in terms of interference with the suspect/defendant's patrimony the possibility of the judicial bo...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nicolae Titulescu University Publishing House
2024-05-01
|
| Series: | Challenges of the Knowledge Society |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://cks.univnt.ro/download/cks_2024_articles%252F1_CKS_2024_CRIMINAL_LAW%252FCKS_2024_CRIMINAL_LAW_012.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Given that the judicial practice is non-unified with respect to the time-limit in which the precautionary measure ordered in criminal cases must be verified, I consider it appropriate to analyse in terms of interference with the suspect/defendant's patrimony the possibility of the judicial bodies to maintain the measure, both before the deadline established by law has expired, as well as after, in order to unify/standardise the application of the legal provisions in the matter. In other words, the judicial practice is non-unified with respect to the time-limit in which the grounds, which were the basis for taking the precautionary measure in criminal proceedings, can be verified, meaning that there are theories according to which the previously mentioned time-limit is a recommendation time-limit, and not a substantial one which would result in the loss of the right to maintain the measure, after its fulfilment. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2068-7796 |