Journal articles: 'Preventive detention'

1

Krishna Goswami, Prof Avinash, Dr Ritu Gautam, and Vaibhav Kumar. "Critical Appraisal Of Preventive Detention Provisions Under the National Security Act, 1980." Journal of Legal Studies & Research 08, no. 06 (2022): 293–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.55662/jlsr.2022.8604.

Full text

Abstract:

The primary focus of this paper is on the shortcomings of the existing preventive detention legislation, especially the National Security Act, 1980. India had various laws on preventive detention prior to the existing National Security Act,1980 but they were gradually repealed, and then the current Act was brought, it was initially enacted as an Ordinance by the President in 1980 but now it has become a prominent law on preventive detention. Preventive detention violates the very basic fundamental right of an individual which is the right to personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution and the mandate provided under Article 22 related to the rights of an arrested person is also violated in the case of preventive detention. India is among the few nations where preventive detention law is constitutional whereas in countries like USA and England no such law exists(exception during wartime). Alarming rise in the number of preventive detentions due to the ease provided under the preventive detention laws, there is a need in the Indian legal system to make the authorities accountable for arbitrary detentions and to establish safeguards to ensure fair procedure before restricting people’s freedom.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Frelick, Bill. "Preventive detention." Peace Review 5, no. 3 (September 1993): 305–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10402659308425734.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Doroclea, Andreea Denisa. "Detention." Eximia 12 (September 30, 2023): 180–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.47577/eximia.v12i1.354.

Full text

Abstract:

Preventive measures at present may be ordered only if there is evidence or well-founded character from which there is a reasonable suspicion that the individual has committed a criminal act and is necessary to achieve the aim pursued by taking them. The categories of preventive measures, with the exception of detention and preventive arrest, are changed, defending judicial control, judicial control on bail and house arrest compared to the old regulation which referred to the obligation not to leave the locality and the obligation not to leave the country together with detention and preventive arrest. Procedural aspects are extremely important in this preventive measure, such as the communication under signature of the detained person, of his/her rights and obligations, the duration for which he/she can be detained and, in certain special cases, informing the diplomatic representatives of the state of which the suspect or accused person is a citizen. In the case of certain persons, the law also requires certain additional requirements to be met in order to order detention, such as in the case of deputies or senators or judges, prosecutors or assistant magistrates. The measure of detention is the most used preventive measure and that it has a particular effect on the suspect as well as on the course of the trial. As it has a special status, being the only measure that can only be ordered during criminal investigations, I think it is very important to be aware of it. Detention is a preventive measure in the procedure of which numerous procedural errors can occur, so we considered necessary a thorough study to clarify all aspects of this preventive measure.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Montague, Phillip. "Justifying Preventive Detention." Law and Philosophy 18, no. 2 (March 1999): 173. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3505196.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Gray, Anthony. "Preventive Detention Laws." Alternative Law Journal 30, no. 2 (April 2005): 75–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1037969x0503000205.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Teteriatnyk, H. K. "PREVENTIVE DETENTION: LEGAL REGULATION ISSUES." Herald of criminal justice, no. 1-2 (2023): 96–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2413-5372.2023.1-2/96-107.

Full text

Abstract:

It is proved that preventive detention is one of the specific measures to ensure criminal proceedings, which was introduced in connection with the beginning of the anti-terrorist operation in Ukraine. It is stated that the existing gaps and inconsistencies in the legislation on preventive detention create significant risks of human rights violations, as well as reduce the effectiveness of ensuring the rights of persons to whom it can be applied, create preconditions for declaring evidence inadmissible. The purpose of the article is to obtain scientific results in the form of theoretical provisions for preventive detention and the formulation of proposals to improve existing legislation. The article analyzes the norms of the legislation governing the issue of preventive detention, draws attention to the inconsistencies of the norms of various legal acts, the existing gaps in the regulation of the grounds, terms and procedure of preventive detention. It is proved that the normative should be clearly defined: the concepts, grounds and conditions of preventive detention, its procedure. Based on the study, the author proposed amendments to the current CPC in order to improve the regulations of the institution of preventive detention. It is stated that the term “preventive detention” is not relevant to the meaning of the precautionary measure, which is understood by it. The author’s definition of “exceptional detention in the area of anti-terrorist operation / environmental protection” is offered. It is proposed to include in paragraph 2 of Chapter 18 of the CPC of Ukraine the article “Exceptional detention in the area of anti-terrorist operation / environmental protection” defining the concept, grounds and conditions of preventive detention, the procedure for obtaining permission for preventive detention, west; determination of the rights and guarantees of their realization by the detained person; the procedure for judicial control, determination of the status of property seized during a personal search and terms for its arrest.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

WORMITH, J. S., and MONIKA RUHL. "Preventive Detention in Canada." Journal of Interpersonal Violence 1, no. 4 (December 1986): 399–430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/088626086001004002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Gershevskiy, Y. R. "Judicial jurisdiction in the application of a preventive measure in the form of detention." Russian justice 1 (January 28, 2021): 68–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.18572/0131-6761-2021-1-68-70.

Full text

Abstract:

The article deals with a set of problems related to judicial jurisdiction in the application of preventive measures in the form of detention. A number of additions to existing legislation on the use of preventive measures in the form of detention are proposed. This article deals with the peculiarities of the application of a preventive measure, such as detention. The main features of its use were established. The procedural characteristics of such a type of preventive measures as detention are studied, the procedural measures related to the detention of a suspect/ accused/defendant are analyzed, the provisions of the current criminal procedure law are analyzed. It is stated that ensuring the rights of suspects accused when choosing and applying a preventive measure in the form of detention against them is faced with difficulties, primarily due to the fundamental problems of the entire Russian criminal proceedings: the excessive length of the proceedings, its excessive bureaucratization, formalism, the hypertrophied role of the preliminary investigation before the trial, poor conditions of detention and others. Materials of St. Petersburg, Arkhangelsk region are used.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Nino, Michele. "European Arrest Warrant; Preventive Detention." Journal of Criminal Law 71, no. 6 (December 2007): 501–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1350/jcla.2007.71.6.501.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Corrado, Michael. "Punishment, quarantine, and preventive detention." Criminal Justice Ethics 15, no. 2 (June 1996): 3–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0731129x.1996.9992013.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Davis, Michael. "Preventive detention, Corrado, and me." Criminal Justice Ethics 15, no. 2 (June 1996): 13–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0731129x.1996.9992014.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Habermeyer, Elmar, Daniel Passow, Peter Puhlmann, Knut Vohs, and Sabine Herpertz. "Sexual Offenders in Preventive Detention." International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 53, no. 4 (March 31, 2008): 373–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306624x08316152.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Chiswick, Derek. "Preventive detention exhumed – and enhanced." Psychiatric Bulletin 23, no. 12 (December 1999): 703–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/pb.23.12.703.

Full text

Abstract:

In 1997 there were 57 000 notifiable crimes of serious or sexual violence recorded by police in England and Wales (Home Office, 1998) – more than 1000 per week or approximately one every 10 minutes. On 15 February 1999 the Home Secretary, Jack Straw, announced new measures “better to protect the public from dangerous people in our society” (House of Commons, 1999). He said the measures were to target “those who are capable of committing acts of a serious sexual or violent nature”. Of the 57 000 potential targets, Mr Straw believes 1800 men are already detained in prisons and special hospitals; he intends to identify a further 500 or so men currently at liberty and lock them away indefinitely, in advance of their offending. His intention in respect of the other 54 700 violent or sexual offenders, responsible for 99% of serious violence, is not stated. Mr Straw believes that the 500 men in the community (and the 1800 in custody) share a common psychiatric condition and that this is what makes them dangerous. His policy for identifying the men, and what he intends to do with them and similar people, is contained in the recently published consultation paper on dangerous people with severe personality disorder (Home Office & Department of Health, 1999).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Galochkin, D. A. "The State of Law in the Application of Preventive Measures in the Form of Detention." Juridical Science and Practice 15, no. 3 (2019): 85–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.25205/2542-0410-2019-15-3-85-91.

Full text

Abstract:

Based on the analysis of statistical indicators of Prosecutor's office work on supervision on implementation of laws by administrations of detentions, the main problems prevailing in detention centers and related with application of a preventive measure as a pre-trial detention against suspects and accused of committing crimes are given in the article. The analysis of the activity of the European court of human rights on consideration of Russian citizens claims about violations of the Federal law of 15.07.1995 No. 103-FZ "About incarceration of suspects and accused of committing crimes" is carried out, as well as measures taken by the Russian Federation to eliminate them. The causes of overcrowding in remand centers occurred in Moscow, Moscow region and a number of other regions are analyzed. The author made suggestions to improve current legislation. The article contains recommendations to prosecutors supervising the implementation of laws by administrations of pre-trial detention facilities, as well as the preliminary investigation of criminal cases.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

ILIN, DANILA. "DETENTION AND HOME ARREST: THEORETICAL AND LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION." Gaps in Russian Legislation 14, no. 4 (July 28, 2021): 308–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.33693/2072-3164-2021-14-4-308-317.

Full text

Abstract:

The article presents the results of a comparative legal analysis of the use of preventive measures in the form of detention and home arrest. Both of these measures are forms of isolation from society of suspects, accused persons, and defendants in criminal proceedings. Thus, detention as a preventive measure, as a general rule, is applied by a court decision against a suspect or accused of committing crimes for which the criminal law provides for a penalty of imprisonment for a term of more than three years, if it is impossible to apply another, more lenient, preventive measure. When choosing a preventive measure in the form of detention, the judge's decision must specify the specific, factual circumstances on the basis of which the judge made such a decision. Such circumstances may not be data that has not been verified during the court session, in particular the results of operational search activities, submitted in violation of the requirements of Article 89 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. At the same time, house arrest, along with detention, is classified as a preventive measure that restricts freedom. These measures are identical in terms of preventing consequences. However, this circumstance is often not taken into account by the court. This conclusion is supported by statistics showing a low level of use of home arrest. The article examines the evolution of the legal regulation and application of detention and home arrest. The conclusion is made about the historical continuity of both positive and negative experiences. In particular, the use of detention as a means of influence to obtain "necessary evidence", a punitive measure, which does not follow from its essence, is traced. Unfortunately, this practice still exists today, as confirmed by the examples given in the article. The article examines the conceptual aspects of the use of detention and home arrest as an alternative to isolation from society. Proposals for amendments to the criminal procedure legislation aimed at minimizing abuses in the appointment and execution of procedural preventive measures in the form of detention and home arrest are formulated and justified.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Clavijo-Vergara, Andrés Santiago, and Daniela Fernanda López-Moya. "La prisión preventiva ¿medida cautelar o pena anticipada? Una visión desde Ecuador." Revista Metropolitana de Ciencias Aplicadas 6, Suplemento 1 (March 1, 2023): 18–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.62452/c596vn43.

Full text

Abstract:

Preventive detention is conceptualized as a precautionary measure, to guarantee the immediacy of the accused person at the different stages of the criminal process; It constitutes a precautionary mechanism and not social control, as has been erroneously applied in recent years in Ecuador. This article intends to analyze the scope of preventive detention, its purpose, object and normative regulation. It is necessary to take into account that the legal duty of the prosecution and the jurisdictional function, to guarantee legal certainty under special compliance with the principle of motivation; establishes the study of preventive detention in adherence to criteria of necessity, proportionality and exceptionality, as a measure of last resort. To carry out this investigation, a mixed methodology is used, through inductive - deductive methods, which show the misapplication of preventive detention in the Ecuadorian procedural system; where, in most cases, preventive detention has been established as an instrument to anticipate sentence, and not procedural precaution, distorting the true object of this extreme measure, violating the principle of innocence and the right to freedom of the prisoner accused.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Dünkel, Frieder, and Dirk van Zyl Smit. "Preventive Detention of Dangerous Offenders Re-examined: A Comment on two decisions of the German Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG – 2 BvR 2029/01 of 5 February 2004 and BVerfG – 2 BvR 834/02 – 2 BvR 1588/02 of 10 February 2004) and the Federal Draft Bill on Preventive Detention of 9 March 2004." German Law Journal 5, no. 6 (June 1, 2004): 619–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s207183220001275x.

Full text

Abstract:

Preventive detention is, together with life imprisonment, the harshest sanction in German criminal law. In the form of a “measure for improvement and security” of indeterminate duration, preventive detention potentially may be enforced until the death of the offender. Such a measure may be imposed together with a term of imprisonment on offenders regarded as dangerous and implemented after the fixed term of imprisonment has been served. The history of this provision goes back to a Nazi law against habitual criminals that was enacted in 1933 and retained after the end of the Second World War. In the context of the debate about the new criminal laws in the 1960s preventive detention was severely criticised. The result was that in 1969 both the formal and material requirements for the imposition of preventive detention were made more restrictive. This led, in turn, to it being imposed far less frequently. While in the 1960s more than 200 people were sentenced to preventive detention annually, by the early 1990s this figure was fewer than 40 a year. There was an equivalent reduction of the number of people in prison on preventive detention on a given day, from around 1500 at the beginning of the 1960s to fewer than 200 in the 1980s, that is, about 0.3 per cent of the total prison population.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Simpson, Alexander I. F. "Psychiatrists' role in preventive detention: New Zealand's legislation for indefinite detention." Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 5, no. 1 (April 1998): 87–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13218719809524922.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Kaspar, Johannes. "Preventive detention in German criminal law." Peking University Law Journal 4, no. 1 (January 2, 2016): 79–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20517483.2016.1174427.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Lippke, Richard L. "Preventive Pre-trial Detention without Punishment." Res Publica 20, no. 2 (February 27, 2014): 111–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11158-013-9234-6.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Castillo Capa, Beder Octavio, and Nuria Shirley Ordinola Quintana. "Application of preventive detention and its extension." SCIÉNDO 27, no. 1 (March 30, 2024): 105–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.17268/sciendo.2024.016.

Full text

Abstract:

The current research work aims to determine whether preventive detention and its extension are currently being applied under strict compliance with the regulations (Articles 268º and 274º of the CPP) by those involved (Public Ministry – Judiciary), without violating fundamental rights of the accused, for this; The basic descriptive level research methodology with a qualitative approach was also used; It has a research design based on thematic analysis, the interview guide, documentary guide, magazines and research papers were used as tools. The result has been that preventive detention and its extension are being applied as an early sentence and due to political or media pressure or extensive interpretations of the established budgets. It is concluded that its application violates fundamental rights such as the right to freedom, presumption of innocence, to be tried within a reasonable time and that it has lost its exceptional nature.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Mustaffa, Aminuddin, Mohd Badrol Awang, Nazli Ismail Nawang, and Yusramizza Md Isa @ Yusuff. "PREVENTIVE DETENTION OF CHILDREN UNDER MALAYSIAN LAWS: A CASE FOR REFORM." UUM Journal of Legal Studies 11 (July 31, 2020): 97–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.32890/uumjls.11.2.2020.8687.

Full text

Abstract:

Preventive detention refers to the incarceration of an individual who has not yet been convicted, to prevent him from causing harm or endangering the community in some unspecified way. It can be seen as the deprivation of an individual’s liberty based on the belief that he may be a danger to others. The issue of preventive detention of children is very controversial and has attracted debate among various legal scholars. In Malaysia, provisions contained in specific statutes that aim to prevent terrorism or threats to national security have been invoked to justify the preventive detention of children. The practice and application of these statutory provisions on children have been subjected to various criticism. This paper aims to analyze current Malaysian laws pertaining to the preventive detention of children. It encompasses qualitative research of doctrinal and comparative nature. It will critically analyze legal issues in this area with reference to international standards and practices of other legal systems. The study concludes that the legal reform of the current Malaysian legal framework on this aspect is urgently needed to protect the rights and interests of children during the juvenile justice processes. Therefore, the study provides recommendations towards the improvement of the existing laws and policies on the preventive detention of children.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Niyazov, Макsud. "Problems of ensuring the validity of the application of a preventive measure in the form of detention." Criminology and Criminal Justice 1, no. 1 (February 23, 2022): 146–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.51788/tsul.ccj.1.1./cfjd2045.

Full text

Abstract:

Тhis article analyzes the procedure at the present time for applying a preventive measure in the form of detention during the preliminary investigation, paying attention to the procedure for the actions, their importance and limits of authority of the organs involved in this process. In addition, the article provides a comparative analysis of the activities of the courts of the Russian Federation, their self-dependence in the application of preventive measures in the form of detention with the appropriate proposals for improving legislation and ensuring the true independence of the courts in the application of a preventive measure in the form of detention.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Vershinina, S. I. "On the excessive use of detention." Juridical Journal of Samara University 9, no. 3 (October 10, 2023): 18–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.18287/2542-047x-2023-9-3-18-24.

Full text

Abstract:

Based on the statistical data on the use of preventive measures presented on the website of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the article examines the reliability of allegations of excessive use of detention and insufficient use of non-isolation preventive measures. By comparing the indicators that reveal the total number of defendants whose criminal cases were sent to the court of first instance and the number of application of “judicial” preventive measures in pre-trial and trial proceedings, the number of persons against whom preventive measures not related to isolation were applied is determined and a conclusion is made on the sufficient use of preventive measures alternative to detention. Discussing the thesis about the excessive use of detention, the author focuses on the ratio of the number of convicts to actual imprisonment and the number of accused in custody. Allegations about the excessive use of detention are reliable only in cases where the number of accused in respect of whom a measure of restraint was applied exceeds the number of persons sentenced to real imprisonment.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Edwards, Alice. "THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND THE DETENTION OF REFUGEES." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 57, no. 4 (October 2008): 789–825. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589308000596.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture entered into force on 22 June 2006. It establishes a Sub-Committee for the Prevention of Torture that has authority to visit places of detention and to assess the conditions of that detention as a way to reduce the incidence of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Additionally, States parties are required to set up complementary national preventive mechanisms. This article explores both how these mechanisms established under the Optional Protocol could operate in the context of the detention of refugees and/or asylum-seekers, which is an increasingly common occurrence in many parts of the world, as well as whether they add value to existing international mechanisms that are already available in this field. It examines the purported applicability of the Optional Protocol to four refugee/asylum situations, namely detention at airports and other border zones; immigration (or administrative) detention, including semi-open (or semi-closed) asylum centres; closed refugee camps; and extraterritorial processing or holding centres. Reviewing definitional, jurisdictional, and practical issues that may impact on the success or otherwise of these new preventive mechanisms, this article concludes by making a number of recommendations to aid their work in the refugee/asylum context.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Smatlaev, B. М., and Ye K. Daurembekov. "Some issues of the application of preventive measures in the form of house arrest and detention in criminal proceedings." Bulletin of the Karaganda University. “Law Series” 112, no. 4 (December 30, 2023): 66–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.31489/2023l4/66-75.

Full text

Abstract:

Taking into account the current international and national legislation aimed at settling criminal procedural and penal enforcement relations between the participating entities in the pre-trial process, special attention is paid to the process of preventing violations of the constitutional rights and freedoms of persons under house arrest or detention. In this regard, a comprehensive analysis is being carried out of the procedure for choosing preventive measures in the form of house arrest and detention by the criminal prosecution authorities and the investigating judge in relation to the suspect, accused or defendant. Analyzing statistical indicators on the se- lection of preventive measures, in particular house arrest and detention, there is a need to apply an alternative measure of restraint to detention, which is explained by a number of reasons and conditions. As a result, this will allow us to reduce the workload in the penitentiary system, save budget funds allocated for the mainte- nance of a suspect, accused or defendant in a pre-trial detention center, and solve some issues related to social adaptation in the future. In this direction, there is an analysis of the current national legislation at the level of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On the procedure and conditions for the maintenance of special premises in special institutions providing temporary isolation of persons from society”. Based on the generalization and comprehensive analysis of existing regulatory sources, educational, methodological and scientific literature, statistical and legal approaches, the content of the article reflects the position of the authors regarding the improvement of criminal procedural mechanisms for the application of preventive measures in the form of house arrest and detention. These proposals are re- lated, according to the authors, to the development of clear procedural mechanisms for the development of a preventive measure in the form of house arrest in pre-trial proceedings in Kazakhstan.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Grushin, Fedor Vladimirovich, Irina Anatol’evna Zhilko, and Chulpan Sheukatovna Kupirova. "REALIZATION BY ENTREPRENEURS HELD IN PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CENTERS OF THE RIGHT TO ISSUE DOCUMENTS CERTIFIED BY A NOTARY." Penal law 17, no. 4 (December 15, 2022): 465–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.33463/2687-122x.2022.17(1-4).4.465-472.

Full text

Abstract:

Taking into account the analysis of the current legislation, including the new Internal Regulations of pre-trial detention facilities of the penal enforcement system in 2022, judicial statistics and law enforcement practice, the article examines some features of the implementation by entrepreneurs held in pre-trial detention facilities of the right to issue documents certified by a notary. In relation to entrepreneurs accused of committing crimes in the field of entrepreneurial and other economic activities, a preventive measure in the form of detention may be applied only as an exception. At the same time, there are a number of exceptions to the prohibition on the use of a preventive measure in the form of detention against entrepreneurs provided for in Part 1.1 of Article 108 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. There is a certain legal mechanism for applying a preventive measure in connection with the right of an accused entrepreneur held in a pre-trial detention center to meet with a notary. The new Internal Regulations of pre-trial detention facilities of the penal enforcement system establish a certain procedure for visits of suspects and accused persons in the field of entrepreneurial activity with a notary in order to certify a power of attorney for the right to represent interests.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Malinkovska, O. V., O. I. Tymoshchuk, and M. B. Husak. "PLACE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE IN THE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM CONCERNING PROTECTION OF CONVICTS AND PRISONERS’ RIGHTS AND LEGAL INTERESTS." Scientific Herald of Sivershchyna. Series: Law 2022, no. 2 (July 12, 2022): 100–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.32755/sjlaw.2022.02.100.

Full text

Abstract:

The genesis of the National Preventive Mechanism is examined in the article. The fact that the chosen model of “Ombudsman +” involves a combination of the Ombudsman’s Institute, along with representatives of non-governmental organizations and members of the public is found out. The implementation of the Ombudsman + model envisages that not only the Ombudsman himself will be involved in the process of monitoring the human rights observance in places of detention, but also members of the public who will be able to visit places of detention after receiving certain rights from the Ombudsman and check human rights there and then report to the central office, in order to fix the problems or provide recommendations to local (or central) executive bodies for improving the situation. Emphasis is placed on the fact that the establishment of the National Preventive Mechanism should in no way duplicate the functions of bodies such as the Prosecutor’s Office or the National Police. Proposed changes will help to improve the proper implementation of the National Preventive Mechanism: improvements of the legislation governing the activities of places of detention; changes in the standards of providing certain social services (applies to social places of detention); creation of bodies to monitor compliance with standards in places of detention; creation of new monitoring mechanisms to monitor compliance with standards during the stay of people in places of detention; changes in the attitude of society towards people who find themselves in places of detention and promoting the policy of “openness” of such institutions, etc. Key words: Commissioner for Human Rights of the Verkhovna Rada, National Preventive Mechanism; rights and legitimate interests; convicts; prisoners; “Ombudsman +”.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Kaliman, M. R. "Police custody: preventive or coercive police measure." Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, no. 2 (May 11, 2024): 463–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2024.02.78.

Full text

Abstract:

The scientific article is an attempt to find out whether police care belongs to a preventive or coercive police measure: It has been established that in view of the legal basis, police custody is clearly classified as preventive police measures. It is emphasized that the essence of police custody is the limitation of some constitutional human rights, although the purpose of applying the measure is preventive - prevention of offenses committed by persons subject to police custody and in relation to such persons. It was determined that police custody should be carried out taking into account, first of all, guarantees of human rights and freedoms, guided by the principles of the rule of law. The analysis of the theory of administrative law and the normative legal grounds for the use of police custody allowed the author to attribute the latter to measures of administrative coercion, namely, measures of administrative prevention. It has been proven that the purpose of applying administrative prevention measures coincides with the purpose of applying police supervision. The article delimits police custody from the delivery and detention of the offender. The author dispels the myth about the identity of police custody, delivery and administrative detention, because they fundamentally differ in their purpose, the place where the person is delivered, the terms of application, and the legal meaning. Emphasis is placed on the fact that the parallel application of other preventive police measures (surface inspection, document verification, interviews) is possible during the implementation of any of these measures. Attention was drawn to the fact that police coercive measures (measures of physical influence, special measures) can be applied during delivery and administrative detention, but not during police custody. It was concluded that there is a platform for discussion about the affiliation of police custody to a specific type of police measures.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Barbu, Denisa. "A General Overview on the Ethics of Pre-trial Detention." Journal for Ethics in Social Studies 4, no. 1 (2020): 09–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.18662/jess/4.1/24.

Full text

Abstract:

The measure of pre-trial detention is one of the five preventive measures regulated by the legislator in Title V of the general part of the new Criminal Procedure Code, adopted by Law no. 135/2010 and implemented on February 1st, 2014, along with detention, judicial control, judicial control on bail and house arrest. Preventive measures are institutions of criminal procedural law, and have a coercive character, aimed at the deprivation or the restriction of individual liberty, whereby the suspect or defendant is prevented from undertaking certain activities that would adversely affect the proper conduct of criminal proceedings or achieving the purpose of the criminal trial. Regarding the cases of pre-trial detention and the conditions that must be met in order to take the measure of pre-trial detention, it must be said that they result from the corroborated examination of the provisions of art. 202 para. 1 and 3, and art. 223 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Article 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code regulates the general conditions for taking preventive measures, in general, and the provisions of art. 223 of the Criminal Procedure Code regulates the specific conditions for taking the measure of pre-trial detention.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Andenas, Mads, and Eirik Bjorge. "“Preventive Detention.” No. 2 BvR 2365/09." American Journal of International Law 105, no. 4 (October 2011): 768–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.105.4.0768.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Steinböck, Herbert R. "New developments in preventive detention in Germany." Current Opinion in Psychiatry 22, no. 5 (September 2009): 488–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/yco.0b013e32832ed7da.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Bojczenko, Mickael N., and Diane Sivasubramaniam. "A Psychological Perspective on Preventive Detention Decisions." Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 23, no. 4 (March 10, 2016): 629–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2016.1142932.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Forrester, Andrew. "Preventive detention, public protection and mental health." Journal of Forensic Psychiatry 13, no. 2 (January 2002): 329–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585180210151248.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Peter, Chris Maina. "Incarcerating the Innocent: Preventive Detention in Tanzania." Human Rights Quarterly 19, no. 1 (1997): 113–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hrq.1997.0005.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Hlyvchak, Olga, and Olena Kovalchuk. "Problems of precautionary measure application in the view of detention under guard in Ukraine." Visnik Nacional’nogo universitetu «Lvivska politehnika». Seria: Uridicni nauki 10, no. 40 (December 18, 2023): 294–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.23939/law2023.40.294.

Full text

Abstract:

Annotation. The article examines problematic issues related to the use of preventive measures in the form of detention in criminal cases and the experience of foreign countries in this area. The practice of the European Court of Human Rights regarding detention and its decisions are analyzed in the context of legal norms and standards related to human rights. Particular attention is paid to the experience of countries where alternative preventive measures are implemented in order to improve the justice system and ensure human rights, which can be effective and do not limit human rights to such a severe degree as detention. In addition, issues related to unsubstantiated detention decisions, excessively long proceedings and the need to increase the transparency of this process are considered. The importance of observing human rights during the application of a measure in the form of detention, which is the most severe and restrictive measure, is particularly emphasized, therefore its application must be justified and fair.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Meek, John. "The Revival of Preventive Detention in New Zealand 1986–93." Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 28, no. 3 (December 1995): 225–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000486589502800301.

Full text

Abstract:

A sensational offence by a recently released prisoner with a long history of sexual offending led to the scope of preventive detention being extended in 1987 prompting a dramatic increase in use of this sentence by the New Zealand courts. A committee of inquiry had previously criticised this sentence, which provides for the indefinite detention of dangerous offenders, as ‘arbitrary, selective and inequitable’ and recommended its abolition. In the 1987–93 period, a total of 48 persons received this sentence compared with 28 during the previous 19 years. The revival of preventive detention is seen as a case study of law and order politics as this previously little used sentence became a central feature of the efforts of successive governments to respond to increasing levels of violent crime. The principal deficiencies of this sentence are identified as (1) inconsistency in its use; (2) its lack of focus and the Court of Appeal's failure to provide meaningful guidance to judges; and (3) the severity of the sentence which involves detention for a minimum term of 10 years.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Merkel, Grischa. "Case Note - Retrospective Preventive Detention in Germany: A Comment on the ECHR Decision Haidn v. Germany of 13 January 2011." German Law Journal 12, no. 3 (March 1, 2011): 968–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s207183220001717x.

Full text

Abstract:

In four judgements of 13 January 2011 the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg returned to the issues raised in its earlier jurisprudence regarding preventive detention (“Sicherungsverwahrung”) under German criminal law. In its decision of 17 December 2009, M. v. Germany, the Court had held that the German Criminal Law's retroactive extension of confinement in preventive detention failed to meet the requirement of lawful detention “after conviction” under Art. 5 § 1 (a) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter “the Convention”), and violates the prohibition of retroactivity (Art. 7 § 1 of the Convention). The articles read as follows:

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Shaporenko, Anastasiya A. "Preventive Record as Means of Crime Prevention in a Detention Facility." CRIMINAL-EXECUTORY SYSTEM: LAW, ECONOMICS, MANAGEMENT 3 (May 11, 2017): 24–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.18572/2072-4438-2017-3-24-25.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Kalygulova, A. "On the Powers of an Investigating Judge in the Application of a Preventive Measure in the Form of Detention in Criminal Proceedings of the Kyrgyz Republic." Bulletin of Science and Practice 7, no. 2 (February 15, 2021): 291–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/63/33.

Full text

Abstract:

The article is devoted to the issue of the powers of the investigating judge in the application of a preventive measure in the form of detention in criminal proceedings of the Kyrgyz Republic. The relevance of the study is due to the introduction of a new procedural figure of the investigating judge exercising judicial control in pre-trial proceedings, as well as applying measures and restricting the rights and freedoms of the suspect. The powers of the investigating judge to apply a preventive measure in the form of detention affect the right to freedom guaranteed by the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic. In this regard, the issue of considering the powers of the investigating judge regarding the application of the above preventive measure is relevant. The object of the research: an investigating judge-judge who applies measures restricting the rights and freedoms of a suspect, exercising judicial control over the legality of procedural actions and decisions of persons carrying out pre-trial proceedings and the prosecutor. The subject of the study: the powers of the investigating judge to apply, refuse restraint in the form of detention, as well as extend the period of detention.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Kalygulova, Alima. "ON THE QUESTION OF THE VALIDITY OF THE USE OF BAIL BY THE INVESTIGATING JUDGE AS A PREVENTIVE MEASURE." Alatoo Academic Studies 21, no. 2 (June 30, 2021): 346–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.17015/aas.2021.212.39.

Full text

Abstract:

The article is devoted to the issue of the validity of the use of bail by the investigating judge as a preventive measure. The relevance of the study is due to the fact that in the law enforcement practice of criminal proceedings, when deciding on the application of a preventive measure, detention is most often used and, in a rare case, other measures are applied. Bail as a measure of restraint and specific instructions in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Kyrgyz Republic, as well as the grounds for which it is necessary to apply this measure of restraint, could make it possible to resolve a large number of issues such as overcrowding in places of detention, preventing arbitrariness when deciding on the measure suppression, elimination of corruption and would give an opportunity to observe the principle of the presumption of innocence.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Park, Jung-nan. "A Review for the Direction of Establishing Desirable Detention Standard: Focusing on A Harmonious Operation Between Conditional Release and Preventive Detention." Korean Association of Criminal Procedure Law 16, no. 1 (March 30, 2024): 83–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.34222/kdps.2024.16.1.83.

Full text

Abstract:

‘Investigation and trial without detention’ is an explicit principle that criminal procedure law regulates, and suspects can only be detained when grounds for detention under the law exist. However, it is improper to maintain to apply current grounds for detention considering continuous circumstances, in which suspects, who were released for the reason there are no grounds for detention, inflict social hazards such as harming the victims. For the circumstance that the suspect has a steady residence and when there is no worry about the suspect destroying evidence or running away but there is a high possibility that the suspect harms the victim again or creates another victim by doing another crime, it is known that the Supreme Court is considering ‘expansion of grounds for detention’ and ‘adopt of conditional release’ to deal with the suspect’s whereabouts. Although the consideration of the Supreme Court has already been in practice and academia for a long time, claiming two different policies was indeed from two different perspectives. The ‘expansion of grounds for detention’ has been claimed from the perspective that highlights the necessity of investigation under detention, however the ‘adoption of conditional release’ has been insisted from the view that emphasizes the thorough realization of the principle of 'investigation without detention'. However, the ‘expansion of grounds for preventive detention’ and ‘conditional release’ are by no means separate directions on parallel lines, but when operated in harmony together, desirable detention standards can be established and the problems currently faced can be resolved. This thesis demonstrated the way to harmoniously operate both policies. The suspects need ‘grounds for detention’ to gain conditional release as ‘Conditional release’ does have a characteristic of probation of detention. Therefore, to prevent social hazards by conditionally releasing the suspects who can harm the victim or have a high danger of recidivism, it is needed to expand ‘grounds for detention’ so that ‘the possibility of harm to the victim’, ‘the danger of recidivism’ and others can be acknowledged to be ‘grounds for detention.' The major purposes of detention basically are the progress of the criminal procedure and securing the execution of punishment, though, preventive detention should be recognized to be another important purpose of detention, as it prevents a suspect suspected of a crime with highly probable evidence from freely acting so that he or she cannot cause another crime or harm the victim again and therefore keeps the security of individual citizens and society. Leading countries such as the U.S., Germany, France, and many others broadly accept grounds for detention including preventive detention while they also operate a system similar to conditional release. On the other hand, specific standards are required to prevent arbitrary abuse of the judge’s discretion in selection between executing an arrest warrant or conditional release. The standards need to be established in three concrete ways. Firstly, as sentencing factors do, ways that considering factors for grounds for detention can be reflected objectively and practically should be devised, and specific standards such as reasons for the prohibition of conditional release or those considering factors should be regulated on related laws such as criminal procedure law. Secondly, a judge in charge of a warrant should notify the suspect and the prosecutor with a document that includes detailed reasons for the decision of the suspect’s detention. Lastly, direct means of objection, such as a warrant appeal system need to be introduced.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Campesi, Giuseppe. "Genealogies of Immigration Detention: Migration Control and the Shifting Boundaries Between the ‘Penal’ and the ‘Preventive’ State." Social & Legal Studies 29, no. 4 (November 18, 2019): 527–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0964663919888275.

Full text

Abstract:

The aim of this article is to explore the ambiguous legal status of immigration detention by discussing the main theoretical perspectives on its nature and the functions it plays in contemporary migration policies. After presenting a typological and genealogical reconstruction of immigration detention, the article contends that it should not be seen as being related either to the politics of ‘exception’ or to the expanding reach of ‘penal’ power in a context of mass migration. Instead, the argument presented here is that immigration detention exhibits the characteristics of preventive measures typically related to the exercise of police powers and that its increased role in migration policies should be read in the wider framework of the shifting boundaries between the ‘penal’ and the ‘preventive’ state in contemporary societies.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Merkel, Grischa. "Incompatible Contrasts? — Preventive Detention in Germany and the European Convention on Human Rights." German Law Journal 11, no. 9 (September 2010): 1046–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200020095.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article will give an overview of the idea and history of origins of preventive detention and the legal changes in the German Criminal Code that underlie the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) (17 December 2009). It will attempt an outlook by considering the prospective outcome of future law suits against German legal statutes relating to preventive detention, and will also describe the present situation and current legal recommendations, including the much-discussed alternative of detention in psychiatric wards. The article will close with a brief comparative look at the related legal problems arising in countries with a criminal law which is based on the establishment of personal guilt of the offender while facing public pressure to detain persons for protective reasons.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Robinson, Paul H. "Punishing Dangerousness: Cloaking Preventive Detention as Criminal Justice." Harvard Law Review 114, no. 5 (March 2001): 1429. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1342684.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Black, Jessica. "Is the Preventive Detention of Dangerous Offenders Justifiable?" Journal of Applied Security Research 6, no. 3 (July 2011): 317–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19361610.2011.580260.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Brown, Mark. "Preventive Detention and the Control of Sex Crime." Alternative Law Journal 36, no. 1 (March 2011): 10–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1037969x1103600103.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Dean, Malcolm. "london Preventive detention for people with personality disorders." Lancet 354, no. 9176 (July 1999): 403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)75826-8.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Eisenman, Russell. "Selective incapacitation: Preventive detention of the violent offender." Journal of Criminal Justice 21, no. 2 (January 1993): 194–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0047-2352(93)90077-z.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Sabaeva, S. V., and D. E. Gulyaev. "Search for the optimal model of the national preventive mechanism for the Russian Federation (results of a comparative legal study of the legislation of foreign states)." Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)), no. 4 (June 29, 2021): 204–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/2311-5998.2021.80.4.204-218.

Full text

Abstract:

The National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) is a unified system for monitoring the observance of human rights in places of detention, the system complies with international standards. In each State, the National Preventive Mechanism has its own characteristics. The article presents the results of a comparative legal study of the legislation of foreign states that have created the National Preventive Mechanism. Based on these results, identifies and analyzes three existing models of the National Preventive Mechanism in the world, identifies their advantages and disadvantages, and describes in detail all modifications of these models. The scientific work substantiates the author's position that the empowerment of National Preventive Mechanism functions to several decentralized bodies coordinated by one of them is optimal for the Russian Federation. Special attention is paid to the need to include in the National Preventive Mechanism of Russia an independent, regular and preventive public control over the observance of human rights in places of detention.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Journal articles on the topic 'Preventive detention'

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles