Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Zásada ne bis in idem / Journal articles

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Zásada ne bis in idem.

Journal articles on the topic 'Zásada ne bis in idem'

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 25 April 2022

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

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Zásada ne bis in idem.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Schorm, Vít Alexander. "Poznámky na okraj výsledků výzkumu k vnitrostátnímu soudcovskému zacházení s judikaturou Evropského soudu pro lidská práva." Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi 29, no. 2 (July 14, 2021): 389–401. http://dx.doi.org/10.5817/cpvp2021-2-10.

Full text

Abstract:

Na okraj knihy Domestic Judicial Treatment of European Court of Human Rights Case Law. Beyond Compliance, jež je zprávou o tom, jak naše vrcholné soudy naplňují Evropskou úmluvu o lidských právech, autor ve svých poznámkách konstatuje, že nenaplňování Úmluvy je protisystémové jednání a vnitrostátní soudy by v pochybnostech či při nesouhlasu měly s Evropským soudem pro lidská práva zásadně vést dialog. To, že výzkum neodhalil žádné závažné nedostatky, zapadá do příznivého kontextu České republiky a aktivit souvisejících s výkonem rozsudků Soudu. Odpovědi všech tří vrcholných soudů na právní problémy analyzované na mikroúrovni nemusí být z hlediska judikatury Soudu vždy uspokojivé (zásada ne bis idem nebo úřední změna pohlaví). Někdy musejí soudy reagovat na obavy zákonodárce z otevření právní úpravy (restituce majetku nebo regulace nájemného). V oblasti vzdělávání romských dětí se soudy prakticky neangažovaly, a to pro nedostatek vhodných návrhů na zahájení řízení. Kniha je podle autora článku kamínkem v dosud nedokončené mozaice zkoumání problematiky dodržování lidskoprávních závazků státy.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Gaeta, Gennaro. "Ne bis in idem." Archivio penale, no. 2 (2020): 599–614. http://dx.doi.org/10.12871/978883339449714.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Strandbakken, Asbjørn. "Ne bis in idem." Lov og Rett 41, no. 06 (July 3, 2002): 355–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.18261/issn1504-3061-2002-06-04.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Rizqi, Khodijah Puteri Miftahul. "Upaya Hukum yang Dapat Dimohonkan Terhadap Putusan Perkara Pidana yang Ne Bis In Idem." Jurist-Diction 4, no. 1 (January 6, 2021): 195. http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/jd.v4i1.24298.

Full text

Abstract:

Ketentuan ne bis in idem dalam hukum Pidana Indonesia diatur dalam Pasal 76 KUHP tentang hapusnya kewenangan menuntut dan menjalankan pidana. Apabila syarat-syarat berlakunya ne bis in idem ditemukan di dalam pemeriksaan perkara pidana, maka putusan tersebut menjadi bermuatan dakwaan gugur karena alasan ne bis in idem. Terhadap putusan ne bis in idem tersebut pihak yang keberatan dapat mengajukan suatu upaya hukum. Akan tetapi, pengajuan permohonan upaya hukum haruslah dimohonkan pada upaya hukum yang tepat. Untuk mengetahui upaya hukum apa yang tepat dimohonkan terhadap putusan ne bis in idem perlu diketahui bentuk dari putusan ne bis in idem tersebut. Apakah putusan ne bis in idem merupakan putusan bebas karena terdakwa menjadi tidak lagi terbebani oleh dakwaan, ataukah merupakan putusan bentuk yang lain. Dengan mengetahui bentuk dari putusan ne bis in idem maka akan diketahui upaya hukum apa yang paling tepat untuk dimohonkan.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Rizqi, Khodijah Puteri Miftahul. "Upaya Hukum yang Dapat Dimohonkan Terhadap Putusan Perkara Pidana yang Ne Bis In Idem." Jurist-Diction 4, no. 1 (January 6, 2021): 195. http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/jd.v4i1.24298.

Full text

Abstract:

Ketentuan ne bis in idem dalam hukum Pidana Indonesia diatur dalam Pasal 76 KUHP tentang hapusnya kewenangan menuntut dan menjalankan pidana. Apabila syarat-syarat berlakunya ne bis in idem ditemukan di dalam pemeriksaan perkara pidana, maka putusan tersebut menjadi bermuatan dakwaan gugur karena alasan ne bis in idem. Terhadap putusan ne bis in idem tersebut pihak yang keberatan dapat mengajukan suatu upaya hukum. Akan tetapi, pengajuan permohonan upaya hukum haruslah dimohonkan pada upaya hukum yang tepat. Untuk mengetahui upaya hukum apa yang tepat dimohonkan terhadap putusan ne bis in idem perlu diketahui bentuk dari putusan ne bis in idem tersebut. Apakah putusan ne bis in idem merupakan putusan bebas karena terdakwa menjadi tidak lagi terbebani oleh dakwaan, ataukah merupakan putusan bentuk yang lain. Dengan mengetahui bentuk dari putusan ne bis in idem maka akan diketahui upaya hukum apa yang paling tepat untuk dimohonkan.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Accardo, Gabriele, and Frédéric Louis. "Ne Bis in Idem, Part 'Bis'." World Competition 34, Issue 1 (March 1, 2011): 97–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/woco2011005.

Full text

Abstract:

This article addresses the relevance of ne bis in idem, that is, prohibition on double jeopardy, six years after Regulation 1/2003 introduced a major reform of the enforcement system of European Union (EU) competition law. In particular, it considers whether and to what extent parallel action by the European Commission and/or National Competition Authorities (NCAs) is still possible under the modernized system. This article calls for the EU Courts to review the application of the principle of ne bis in idem not only to reflect the changes brought about by Regulation 1/2003 but also to give full effectiveness to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which the Commission and the European Courts are now legally bound to respect, following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Anagnostopoulos, Ilias. "Greece, ne bis in idem." Revue internationale de droit pénal 73, no. 3 (2002): 965. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ridp.733.0965.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Bele, Ivan, and Vid Jakulin. "Slovenia ne bis in idem." Revue internationale de droit pénal 73, no. 3 (2002): 1071. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ridp.733.1071.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Putra, Ilhamdi, and Khairul Fahmi. "Karakteristik Ne Bis In Idem dan Unsurnya dalam Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi." Jurnal Konstitusi 18, no. 2 (November 12, 2021): 345. http://dx.doi.org/10.31078/jk1824.

Full text

Abstract:

Ne bis in idem principle in Mahkamah Konstitusi procedural law (Constitutional Court– CC) found in Article 60 Paragraph (1) of CC Act, in prohibition form to return to trial norms previously reviewed. Discrete from Criminal Code and Civil Code which exact ne bis in idem elements, Article 60 Paragraph (1) has sole element within object review form. This research examines two problems: what are ne bis in idem principle characteristics, and what are the elements in the CC procedural law? The normative judicial research method used to understand ne bis in idem principle elative. Ne bis in idem adaptation in CC procedural law resulted broad philosophical shifts that unaffected Petitioners' legal standing and legality of the object that could bring against them. Based on decision systematics, CC put arguments ne bis in idem at Conclusion, so that it is not a verdict. Meanwhile, ne bis in idem principle in CC procedural law carry several norms, however CC Act only has two elements in legal object and legal subject-relationship forms. Meanwhile, the third element in legal development form is found in the CC decision. Because the legal standing of the Petitioners' and the legality of the object that can be challenged was not disturbed, the three elements did not apply accumulatively, in which the element of legal development was more determinant than the other two elements. As result, constitutionality actualization either occurs through positive decisions granted Petitioners' petition, moreover occurred in cases deemed ne bis in idem.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Schmoll, Julia. "Wettbewerbsrecht; Grundsatz „ne bis in idem“." JUS-EXTRA 36, no. 403 (2020): 19. http://dx.doi.org/10.33196/jus-extra202040307001901.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Rogalski, Maciej. "Rzymskie źródła zasady ne bis in idem." Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego. Seria Prawnicza. Prawo 22 (2018): 114–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.15584/znurprawo.2018.22.8.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Conway, Gerard. "Ne Bis in Idem in International Law." International Criminal Law Review 3, no. 3 (2003): 217–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181203322599110.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Gerecka-Żołyńska, Anna. "Prawomocność decyzji prokuratorskich kończących postępowanie przygotowawcze w świetle dyrektywy ne bis in idem." Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny 81, no. 2 (June 28, 2019): 83–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/rpeis.2019.81.2.7.

Full text

Abstract:

Artykuł dotyczy procesowych skutków prawomocnych decyzji prokuratora o zakończeniu postępowania karnego w konfrontacji z stosowaniem zakazu ne bis in idem. Analiza problemu przeprowadzona została w obrębie dwóch płaszczyzn tematycznych wyznaczonych zakresem obowiązywania zakazu ne bis in idem, tzn. w warunkach krajowych i w ramach współpracy z państwami członkowskimi Unii Europejskiej. W rozważaniach przyjęto, że prawomocne decyzje prokuratorskie o zakończeniu postępowania karnego stwarzają warunki do stosowania zakazu ne bis in idem, gdy pojawia się próba ponownego wszczęcia postępowania karnego wobec tej samej osoby o ten sam czyn. Tendencja ta nie jest charakterystyczna wyłącznie dla systemu polskiego, ale widoczna jest także w ustawodawstwie karnoprocesowym innych państw członkowskich UE, budzi aprobatę w orzecznictwie Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej, ale ostrożną. W ramach współpracy karnej państw członkowskich UE dla wykładni art. 54 Konwencji wykonawczej do układu z Schengen pierwszoplanowe znaczenie ma orzecznictwo TSUE, w którym przede wszystkim wykorzystywana jest zasada wzajemnego uznawania wyroków i orzeczeń sądowych. Związek stosowania zakazu ne bis in idem z zasadą wzajemnego uznawania wyroków i orzeczeń sądowych w ramach współpracy karnej państw członkowskich UE wynika z fundamentalnej roli, jaką zasada ta pełni wobec regulacji przyjętych w Traktacie o funkcjonowaniu UE (Dział: Przestrzeń wolności, bezpieczeństwa i sprawiedliwości). W artykule wykazano, że w przyjęta w polskim systemie karnoprocesowym koncepcja klasyfikowania zakazu ne bis in idem jako ujemnej przesłanki procesowej określonej w art. 17 § 1 pkt 7 Kodeksu postępowania karnego jest rozwiązaniem optymalnym przy założeniu, że skutek res iuducata systemowo zastrzeżony jest wyłącznie dla oceny orzeczeń sądowych. Zwrócono też w odpowiednim zakresie uwagę na znaczenie kwestii tożsamości czynu jako jednego z kryteriów stosowania zakazu ne bis in idem, aprobując powielaną, zwłaszcza w orzecznictwie TSUE, tezę, że w zaistniałej sytuacji niezbędne jest ustalenie, czy czyn, którego dotyczy prawomocne orzeczenie, jest tożsamy z podstawą faktyczną śledztwa lub dochodzenia, w którym postanowienie o umorzeniu postępowania ma zostać wydane z pominięciem oceny przyjętej kwalifikacji prawnej czynu lub interesu prawnego państwa.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Jun, Zhang, Shan Changzong, and Miao Youshui. "China's theoryand practice on ne bis in idem." Revue internationale de droit pénal 73, no. 3 (2002): 865. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ridp.733.0865.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Wasmeier, Martin. "3. The principle of ne bis in idem." Revue internationale de droit pénal 77, no. 1 (2006): 121. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ridp.771.0121.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Gaito, Alfredo. "La progressiva trasfigurazione del ne bis in idem." Archivio penale, no. 1 (2019): 275. http://dx.doi.org/10.12871/978883318050215.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Czudek, Damian. "Zasada ne bis in idem w sprawach podatkowych." Prawo Budżetowe Państwa i Samorządu 7, no. 1 (May 4, 2019): 107. http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/pbps.2019.006.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Harta, Lukas. "Ne bis in idem und Wiederaufleben der Strafbarkeit." Juristische Blätter 143, no. 4 (2021): 267. http://dx.doi.org/10.33196/jbl202104026701.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Lelieur, Juliette. "‘Transnationalising’ Ne Bis In Idem: How the Rule of Ne Bis In Idem Reveals the Principle of Personal Legal Certainty." Utrecht Law Review 9, no. 4 (September 26, 2013): 198. http://dx.doi.org/10.18352/ulr.250.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Butarbutar, Elisabeth Nurhaini. "ASAS NE BIS IN IDEM DALAM GUGATAN PERBUATAN MELAWAN HUKUM." Jurnal Yudisial 11, no. 1 (April 26, 2018): 23. http://dx.doi.org/10.29123/jy.v11i1.167.

Full text

Abstract:

ABSTRAKPengertian asas ne bis in idem adalah terhadap perkara yang sama tidak dapat diadili untuk kedua kalinya. Putusan Nomor 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP sudah pernah diputuskan sebelumnya dan sudah berkekuatan hukum tetap dalam Putusan Nomor 8/PDT.G/2009/PN-RAP, yang amar putusannya menetapkan bahwa para penggugat merupakan pemegang hak yang sah atas objek perkara. Sesuai dengan asas ne bis in idem, maka Putusan Nomor 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP seharusnya ditolak. Namun hakim tetap mengadili dan memutus tuntutan adanya perbuatan melawan hukum. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui kebenaran bahwa Putusan Nomor 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP sama dengan Putusan Nomor 8/PDT.G/2009/PN-RAP, dan pertimbangan hukum apa yang dipakai hakim dalam menetapkan adanya perbuatan melawan hukum. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif, sehingga menggunakan data sekunder sebagai objek analisis. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Putusan Nomor 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP dengan Putusan Nomor 8/PDT.G/2009/PN-RAP, diajukan oleh dan terhadap pihak-pihak yang sama, dalam hubungan yang sama, atas objek yang sama, namun dalil gugatan antara kedua perkara itu berbeda sehingga tidak melanggar asas ne bis in idem. Pertimbangan hakim untuk mendasarkan Putusan Nomor 8/PDT.G/2009/PN-RAP dalam menetapkan adanya unsur perbuatan melanggar hukum adalah asas similia similibus dan asas res judicata pro veritate habetur, yakni bahwa tergugat melanggar hak subjektif penggugat.Kata kunci: asas ne bis in idem, perkara yang sama, putusan hakim, perbuatan melanggar hukum. ABSTRACTThe notion of ne bis in idem principle states that the same case can not be tried for the second time. Court Decision Number 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP has been previously determined and legally binding through Court Decision Number 8/PDT.G/2009/PN-RAP, whose ruling stipulates that the plaintiff is the rightful holder of the case object. In accordance with ne bis in idem principle, Court Decision Number 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP was supposed to be annulled. But the judge continued to prosecute and decided upon charges of tort/unlawful acts. This analysis aims to determine whether the Court Decision Number 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP is the same as that of Number 8/PDT.G/2009/PN-RAP, and judge’s legal considerations in determining the proof of unlawful acts. This study is a normative legal research, using secondary data as the object of analysis. The results of the analysis show that the Court Decision Number 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP with the Court Decision Number 8/PDT.G/2009/PN-RAP, filed by and against the same parties, in the same relation, over the same object, yet the lawsuit argument between the two cases is different so it does not violate the principle of ne bis in idem. The consideration of the judge as the basis of Court Decision Number 8/PDT.G/2009/PN-RAP to set out the element of unlawful acts is the principle of similia similibus and the principle of res judicata pro veritate habetur, stating that the defendant violates the plaintiff’s subjective rights.Keywords: ne bis in idem principle, similar case, judge’s ruling, tort/unlawful acts.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Nuridzhanian, Gaiane. "A Second Bite at the Cherry." Journal of International Criminal Justice 19, no. 5 (November 1, 2021): 1241–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab078.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The principle of ne bis in idem, or the rule against double jeopardy, guarantees that a person is not tried twice in respect of the same matter. In exceptional circumstances ne bis in idem permits revisiting a final conviction or acquittal to correct a flawed verdict. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC, the Court) permits revision of a final conviction delivered by the ICC while a final acquittal of the Court is accorded absolute finality. This article proposes amending the ICC Statute to introduce revision of so-called tainted acquittals, meaning acquittals that have been obtained through offences against administration of justice. Revision of tainted acquittals would allow the ICC to hold responsible perpetrators of crimes within its jurisdiction who might have otherwise benefited from unlawful interference with the proceedings before the Court. It may also discourage interference with the ICC’s administration of justice and strengthen the ne bis in idem guarantee in Article 20(1) of the ICC Statute.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Wils, Wouter P. J. "The Principle of Ne Bis in Idem in EC Antitrust Enforcement: A Legal and Economic Analysis." World Competition 26, Issue 2 (June 1, 2003): 131–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/woco2003001.

Full text

Abstract:

This article deals with the application of the principle of ne bis in idem in EC antitrust enforcement. The principle of ne bis in idem, laid down in Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention on Human Rights and in Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, is the European equivalent of the double jeopardy clause in the United States. It contributes to efficient law enforcement, in that it prevents over-punishment, creates incentives for efficient prosecution, prevents vexatious multiple prosecutions and creates incentives for efficient coordination between prosecutors. The application of the principle of ne bis in idem is of particular importance in the context of the EU network of competition authorities set up by Regulation No. 1/2003. It will have the likely and desirable effect of inducing effective coordination between the European Commission and the competition authorities of the Member States as well as harmonization of their laws and policies on fines and leniency.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Kassada, Daiane Ayumi, and Érika Mendes de Carvalho. "RESPONSABILIDADE DAS PESSOAS JURÍDICAS EM INFRAÇÕES AMBIENTAIS EM FACE DO PRINCÍPIO DO NE BIS IN IDEM: UMA ABORDAGEM POLÍTICO-CRIMINAL." Revista de Criminologias e Politicas Criminais 3, no. 2 (December 1, 2017): 49. http://dx.doi.org/10.26668/indexlawjournals/2526-0065/2017.v3i2.2557.

Full text

Abstract:

O presente estudo analisa o princípio ne bis in idem no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro como recurso político-criminal à contenção do punitivismo estatal. Nessa perspectiva, questiona a sobreposição de sanção administrativa e penal no âmbito dos ilícitos ambientais praticados por pessoas jurídicas e situa o princípio ne bis in idem como estratégia de contenção de iniciativas criminalizadoras, que apenas reforçam o caráter simbólico da intervenção penal e contribuem para a articulação de uma política criminal orientada à expansão do poder punitivo, em detrimento de princípios garantistas elementares.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Vetzo, Max. "The Past, Present and Future of the Ne Bis In Idem Dialogue between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights: The Cases of Menci, Garlsson and Di Puma." Review of European Administrative Law 11, no. 2 (December 31, 2018): 55–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.7590/187479818x15481611819868.

Full text

Abstract:

The cases of Menci (C-524/15), Garlsson (C-537/16) and Di Puma (C-596/16 and C-597/16) deal with the duplication of criminal and punitive administrative proceedings for the same conduct in the area of VAT and market abuse. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held that this duplication of proceedings constitutes a limitation of the ne bis in idem principle of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (Charter). This infringement is only justified if the requirements of the limitation clause of Article 52(1) of the Charter are met. The judgments were highly anticipated as they constitute the response of the CJEU to the judgment in A and B v Norway delivered by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), in which the ECtHR lowered the level of protection afforded by the ne bis in idem principle of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention of Human Rights (A4P7 ECHR). While there are differences between the approaches taken by both courts, it appears that the reasoning of the CJEU in the judgments largely mirrors that of the ECtHR in A and B v Norway. This article frames the judgments in terms of the dialogue between the CJEU and ECtHR on the ne bis in idem principle. It does so chronologically, by focusing on the past, present and future of the ne bis in idem dialogue between both European courts.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Riedl, Eckhard. "Interpol, Festnahmeersuchen, Doppelbestrafungsverbot, ne bis in idem, Datenschutzniveau, angemessenes." JUS-EXTRA 35, no. 393 (2019): 21. http://dx.doi.org/10.33196/jus-extra201939307002101.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Chanun Park. "Ne bis in idem and Retrial in Criminal Justice." Korean Lawyers Association Journal 64, no. 2 (February 2015): 176–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.17007/klaj.2015.64.2.004.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Helenius, Dan. "The Finish Supreme Court on “ne bis in idem”." European Criminal Law Review 1, no. 2 (December 1, 2011): 203–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/219174411798862587.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

de Werd, M. "Het ne bis in idem-beginsel in grensoverschrijdende zaken." Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees Recht 23, no. 4 (May 2017): 79–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.5553/nter/138241202017023004002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Conway, Gerard. "Ne Bis in Idem and the International Criminal Tribunals." Criminal Law Forum 14, no. 4 (2003): 351–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/b:cril.0000042121.16846.55.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Audenaert, Nele, and Wendy De Bondt. "Multi-Offenders In (Double) Jeopardy – Towards Cross-Border Prosecution and Sentencing Rules for Offenders Who Have Committed Multiple Offences." European Criminal Law Review 9, no. 3 (2019): 256–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.5771/2193-5505-2019-3-256.

Full text

Abstract:

The European freedom of movement has led to an increase of criminal cases with a cross-border element. Offenders can easily commit multiple offences on the territory of different Member States or can easily move from one Member State to another after having committed an offence. This might result in some proportionality concerns, since being prosecuted more than once and being punished more than once might cause extra (unjustified) distress on the offender. There is thus a dire need for European rules on prosecution and sentencing in cases with a cross-border element. In this regard, several EU rules are being analysed, more specifically in the light of the prosecution and sentencing of multi-offenders. Of course, the ne bis in idem principle is one of the main rules in this context. It will appear that the ne bis in idem principle’s field of application is still too restricted, too contested and even too unexplored. Not all defendants can enjoy the procedural safeguards called to life by the ne bis in idem principle, nor does unanimity exist with regard to which offenders can invoke the principle. Unfortunately, the more recent legal instruments neither succeed in providing some more procedural safeguards and some more legal certainty for all defendants. This contribution will analyse the lack of procedural safeguards for multi-offenders due to the limited ne bis in idem principle and the non-complementary fields of application of other judicial cooperation instruments on both the prosecution and sentencing level and will make some recommendations in this regard.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Pelican, George. "Aspecte controversate privind aparenta încălcare a principiului ne bis in idem." Criminal Law Writings (Caiete de Drept Penal), no. 3 (February 1, 2021): 76–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.24193/cdp.2020.3.4.

Full text

Abstract:

Fiind fundamentată pe o sistematizare a jurisprudenţei Curţii Europene a Drepturilor Omului şi a Curţii de Justiţie a Uniunii Europene, precum şi pe o analiză cuprinzătoare a lucrărilor de specialitate publicate la nivel naţional şi european, lucrarea de faţă a plecat de la premisa necesităţii asigurării unui just echilibru între interesul societăţii de a reprima în mod efectiv o conduită antisocială şi interesul individual de a nu fi tras la răspundere ori sancţionat în mod repetat pentru aceeaşi faptă antijuridică, demers ce poate părea extrem de dificil de pus în aplicare, în special prin prisma reconfigurării recente a principiului ne bis in idem. Urmare a unei legislaţii supranaţionale cu deficienţe vădite, aspect ce a generat o practică extrem de fluctuantă a instanţelor europene, principiul ne bis in idem a avut parte, de-a lungul timpului, de o evoluţie remarcabilă, evoluţie aşteptată a se extinde din ce în ce mai mult în viitorul apropiat. Chiar dacă în prezent pare a se fi atins, în linii mari, dezideratul existenţei unor criterii de referinţă în scopul interpretării şi aplicării uniforme a acestei garanţii procesuale fundamentale, atât la nivel naţional, cât şi la nivel comunitar au fost generate o serie considerabilă de semne de întrebare relative la anumite ipoteze de încălcare aparentă a principiului ne bis in idem, care cu siguranţă vor mai subzista până la noi intervenţii lămuritoare ale forurilor europene. Astfel, prezentul studiu a fost realizat cu scopul de a releva principalele aspecte controversate şi incertitudini existente la momentul actual în doctrină şi în practică în legătură cu sensul şi domeniul de aplicare a principiului ne bis in idem, propunându-şi, în acelaşi timp, să furnizeze clarificări necesare, precum şi să ofere eventuale soluţii adecvate prin raportare la legislaţia penală şi procesual penală de la nivel naţional.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Błachnio-Parzych, Anna. "Gloss to the Judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-524/15, Criminal Proceedings against Luca Menci." Review of European and Comparative Law 45, no. 2 (June 16, 2021): 207–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.31743/recl.11565.

Full text

Abstract:

This gloss discusses the position of the Court of Justice of the European Union taken in the judgment passed on 20 March 2018 in the case of Luca Menci (C-524/15) in reference to the restrictions of ne bis in idem principle. The main thesis of the Court concerned the admissibility of restrictions of ne bis in idem based on the principle of proportionality as a limitation clause and its accordance with the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The analysis of the right not to be tried or punished twice in Article 4 Protocol 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms allows us to formulate opposite conclusions. The application of the balancing test as a limitation clause for ne bis in idem, finds no support in the case-law of the ECtHR too. According to the Author, the position taken in Menci infringes Article 52(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, according to which the meaning and scope of the rights which correspond to rights guaranteed by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms shall be at least be the same.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Masril, Masril, and Ade Kosasih. "KEBERLAKUAN ASAS NE BIS IN IDEM TERHADAP PUTUSAN PENGADILAN ADAT DALAM TATA HUKUM INDONESIA." AL IMARAH : JURNAL PEMERINTAHAN DAN POLITIK ISLAM 4, no. 1 (August 20, 2019): 49. http://dx.doi.org/10.29300/imr.v4i1.2167.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract: The number of cases have been decided and executed by the Customary Court, but are still being processed and tried according to national law. It creates legal uncertainty and tends to conflict with the values of justice and human rights. This tendency is due to law enforcers who prioritize the principle of nullum delictum noella poena sine pravea lege poenali. The criminal law also acknowledges the principle of ne bis in idem for every decided and executed cases, including the Decision of the Adat Court. The result describes that the application of the principle of ne bis in idem to the Decision of the Customary Court has a place in Indonesian law. This can be recognized from the existence of a Supreme Court jurisprudence which states that if a case has been decided by the Adat Court and brought back to court, the Public Prosecutor's indictment must be declared "unacceptable" Niet On vankelijke Verklaark. The implementation of the principle of legality is not only interpreted as nullum delictum sine lege, seen as formal legality, but also as nullum delictum sine ius, material legality by recognizing customary law as a source of law.Keywoords: Ne bis in idem, Verdict, Customary Court.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Surachman, Rm. "Indonesia, “ne bis in idem”, or “double jeopardy” in indonesia." Revue internationale de droit pénal 73, no. 3 (2002): 1009. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ridp.733.1009.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Bartsch, Hans-Jürgen. "Council of europe ne bis in idem: the european perspective." Revue internationale de droit pénal 73, no. 3 (2002): 1163. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ridp.733.1163.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Lööf, Robin. "54 CISA and the Principles of ne bis in idem." European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 15, no. 3-4 (2007): 309–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/092895607x231189.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Rahmdel, Mansour. "The “Ne bis in idem” rule in Iranian criminal law." Journal of Financial Crime 11, no. 3 (July 2004): 277–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13590790410809211.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Mendonça Júnior, Etéocles Brito, and Ricardo Alves de Lima. "Ne bis in idem penal, processual e na sanção administrativa." Revista do Instituto de Ciências Penais 6, no. 1 (June 2021): 99–142. http://dx.doi.org/10.46274/1909-192xricp2021v6n1p99-142.

Full text

Abstract:

O artigo visa a explorar a natureza jurídica e o impacto do princípio do ne bis in idem na ordem jurídica brasileira, constitucional e infraconstitucional, em seus aspectos penal, administrativo e processual, demonstrando a importância adquirida pelo mesmo através de sua maturação doutrinária, bem como, a evolução do tema nos principais pactos internacionais de proteção de direitos humanos.Visa, ainda, a apontar seus pontos de tensão com o princípio da separação das instâncias e instigar uma breve reflexão sobre a lógica sancionatória agasalhada em nosso ordenamento jurídico, que resta compartilhada por diversos países europeus de tradição romano-germânica, mas recentemente sofreu nova direção pela jurisprudência definida pelo sistema europeu de proteção de direitos humanos.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

de Graaf, F. C. W. (Fanny). "Deelneming aan een criminele organisatie en ne bis in idem." Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht 2, no. 4 (September 2021): 215–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.5553/nts/266665532021002004004.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Pelea, Sanda Ileana. "Ne bis in idem – cumulul unor proceduri penale şi fiscale sau administrative. Cazul Italiei." Criminal Law Writings (Caiete de Drept Penal), no. 2 (November 2, 2020): 42–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.24193/cdp.2020.2.3.

Full text

Abstract:

Unul dintre principiile fundamentale ale dreptului penal european, principiul ne bis in idem este inerent noţiunii de stat de drept şi răspunde unei duble cerinţe, de echitate şi de securitate juridică. Curtea de Justiţie a Uniunii Europene a recunoscut valoarea absolută a acestui principiu prin hotărârea pronunţată în cauza Hans Åkerberg Fransson, C-617/10, în care a stabilit că aplicarea unei sancţiuni fiscale unei persoane, sancţiune care, prin natura şi efectele sale, are un caracter punitiv, împiedică tragerea la răspundere penală a acelui individ pentru aceleaşi fapte de evaziune fiscală. Cauzele italiene Luca Menci, C‑524/15, şi Garlsson Real Estate S.A. şi alţii, C‑537/16, au oferit ocazia unei reorientări în jurisprudenţa Curţii de Justiţie a Uniunii Europene, fiind adusă în discuţie, pentru prima dată în faţa acestei instanţe, condiţiile în care principiul ne bis in idem ar putea fi restrâns prin intermediul unui cumul de proceduri, fiscale şi penale, în domeniul TVA şi în cel al manipulărilor pieţei. Hotărârile din cauzele italiene au fost pronunţate în contextul în care Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului a restrâns, în cauza A şi B contra Norvegiei, nivelul de protecţie oferit de principiul ne bis in idem în temeiul art. 4 din Protocolul nr. 7 al Convenţiei pentru apărarea drepturilor omului şi a libertăţilor fundamentale. Prezentul articol îşi propune să analizeze în mod comparativ considerentele hotărârilor pronunţate de către Curtea de Justiţie a Uniunii Europene în cauzele italiene şi să evidenţieze motivele pentru care instanţa europeană a ajuns la concluzii diferite pe baza unor stări de fapt similare. Cumulul unei proceduri penale cu una administrativă sau fiscală, însă de natură penală, constituie, în viziunea Curţii, o limitare a principiului ne bis in idem, astfel cum acesta este consacrat de art. 50 din Carta drepturilor fundamentale a Uniunii Europene, iar această ingerinţă este justificată numai în condiţiile în care normele de drept intern ale statelor ce permit o asemenea dublare a procedurilor sunt apte să asigure proporţionalitatea restrângerii cu scopul legitim vizat prin reglementarea ei.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Gomes Mendes Diniz, Bráulio. "O NE BIS IN IDEM E O PRINCÍPIO DO DESCONTO NA LEI DE INTRODUÇÃO ÀS NORMAS DO DIREITO BRASILEIRO." Revista Digital Constituição e Garantia de Direitos 13, no. 1 (August 4, 2020): 232–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.21680/1982-310x.2020v13n1id19291.

Full text

Abstract:

O texto analisa os possíveis reflexos das novas regras de direito público incluídas na Lei de Introdução às Normas do Direito Brasileiro (LINDB) na efetivação do princípio do ne bis in idem. Na parte inicial, destacam-se aspectos mais gerais que podem trazer alguma insegurança jurídica, como a sujeição a intepretações consequencialistas das três diferentes esferas mencionadas na lei, em especial pela menção a uma subespécie de instância administrativa, que seria a controladora, o que expõe a efetiva existência de um bis in idem no ordenamento jurídico em matéria de controle no Brasil. A despeito disso, destaca-se a adoção do denominado princípio do desconto ou da compensação no art. 23, §3º, da Lei, o que suaviza o bis in idem então existente. Por fim, apresenta-se um caso hipotético de fraude em licitação para demonstrar de que forma aplicação do princípio do desconto seria possível para as sanções de mesma natureza aplicadas em diferentes processos nas esferas judicial, controladora e administrativa.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Terisno, Prisilia Anggraini Evelyn, and Yuliana Angela. "Penjatuhan Dua Putusan Perkara Pidana Dalam Suatu Objek Perkara Yang Sama." Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law 1, no. 1 (May 25, 2019): 22–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.31960/ijocl.v1i1.145.

Full text

Abstract:

Indonesia is a state of law, so that it can guarantee certainty, benefit and justice for the community. One form of legal certainty for citizens is the implementation of the principle of ne bis in idem. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the judge's decision on two criminal case decisions in one object of the same case. The research method used in the statute approach is the approach by examining all the laws of the regulation that relate to the legal issues and Conceptual Approach, which is an approach that departs from the views and doctrines that developing in law. The result of this writing is that in a criminal case which is a concursus that is tried separately it is not a violation of the principle of ne bis in idem, as long as each of these cases does not have permanent legal force, but it is supposed to guarantee legal certainty against criminal acts of justice and decided in one decision. Negara Indonesia adalah negara hukum, sehingga dapat menjamin adanya kepastian, kemanfaatan dan keadilan bagi masyarakat. Salah satu bentuk kepastian hukum bagi warga negara yaitu dengan pemberlakuan asas ne bis in idem. Tujuan penulisan ini untuk menganalisis putusan hakim terhadap terhadap dua putusan perkara pidana dalam satu objek perkara yang sama. yaitu tujuan praktis, sehingga dapat diterapkan dalam tindak pidana sejenis. Metode penelitian yang digunakan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan atau statute approach, adalah pendekatan yang dilakukan dengan menelaah semua undang-undang dari regulasi yang bersangkut paut dengan isu hukum yang sedang dihadapidan Conceptual Approach, yaitu pendekatan yang beranjak dari pandangan-pandangan dan doktrin-doktrin yang berkembang di dalam ilmu hukum. Hasil dari penulisan ini adalah dalam suatu perkara pidana yang merupakan concursus yang diadili secara terpisah bukan merupakan pelanggaran asas ne bis in idem, selama masing-masing perkara tersebut belum memiliki kekuatan hukum tetap, namun sudah seharusnya untuk menjamin kepastian hukum terhadap tindakan pidana concursus untuk diadili dan diputus dalam satu putusan.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

(PUC Minas), Klélia Canabrava Aleixo, and Flávia Ávila Penido (PUC Minas). "A SUBVERSÃO PRINCIPIOLÓGICA NA EXECUÇÃO PENAL E O PRINCÍPIO NE BIS IN IDEM." DELICTAE: Revista de Estudos Interdisciplinares sobre o Delito 2, no. 2 (June 19, 2017): 227. http://dx.doi.org/10.24861/2526-5180.v2i2.25.

Full text

Abstract:

O presente artigo visa analisar a aplicação do Princípio ne bis in idem à partir da análise de um acórdão do Tribunal de Justiça de Minas Gerais (n.10481.13.005086-9/002) fundamentado na existência de um suposto “bis in idem contra o Estado”. Tem como pano de fundo a estrita vinculação dos princípios à Constituição, notadamente a partir dos estudos do uruguaio Eduardo J. Couture, bem como a premissa de que os princípios, por sua natureza e colocação sistêmica, deveriam ser voltados à proteção do indivíduo. A hipótese de trabalho confirmada é a de que o princípio foi subvertido para estender arbitrariamente o exercício do poder punitivo do Estado. O procedimento metodológico utilizado foi o dedutivo com a realização de pesquisas bibliográfica, documental e jurisprudencial.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Simpson, Claire. "Judgment in C-617/17 PZU Życie: ne bis in idem—First Steps towards a Twofold Test for idem?" Journal of European Competition Law & Practice 10, no. 6 (June 2019): 367–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jeclap/lpz060.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Judgment of 3 April 2019, Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S. A, C-617/17, EU: C: 2019: 283. Fining an undertaking in a single decision for breach of national and EU competition laws does not breach the principle of ne bis in idem.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Poelmann, E., and J. Baron. "Country note: The Principle of Ne Bis in Idem: On the Ropes, but Definitely Not Defeated." Intertax 46, Issue 10 (October 1, 2018): 805–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/taxi2018086.

Full text

Abstract:

In the A. and B. v. Norway case decided by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on 15 November 2016 (24130/11 and 29758/11), the principle of ne bis in idem suffered a significant blow. Via the Luca Menci (C-524/15), Garlsson Real Estate (C-537/16) and Di Puma (C-596/16 and C-597/16) cases, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) was confronted with a challenging decision: either stay with the path set out by the ECJ on 26 February 2013 in the Åkerberg Fransson case (C-617/10) or follow the ECtHR and thereby strike a knockout blow to the right that is guaranteed by the principle of ne bis in idem. In its judgments of 20 March 2018, the ECJ came up with a surprising solution.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Luchtman, Michiel. "The ECJs recent case law on ne bis in idem: Implications for law enforcement in a shared legal order." Common Market Law Review 55, Issue 6 (December 1, 2018): 1717–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/cola2018143.

Full text

Abstract:

The ne bis in idem principle is a forerunner for fundamental rights in the European legal order. It has facilitated integration, but it also meets strong resistance. This contribution deals with the principle of ne bis in idem at the interface of administrative and criminal law enforcement, which has been a particularly controversial issue over the last few years. It analyses the recent case law of the ECJ and explores its consequences, focusing on the extent to which the principle has been made dependent on the degree of harmonization of EU law and on the transnational implications. With the rise of many new forms of transnational cooperation and an increasing focus of the EU legislature on law enforcement, the significance of this case law is hard to overlook.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Némedi, Márk. "Ne bis in idem: a separation of acts in transnational cases?" Perspectives on Federalism 7, no. 2 (November 1, 2015): 85–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pof-2015-0011.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract This paper analyses the case-law of the European Court of Justice on the substantive scope of ne bis in idem in transnational cases and evaluates the findings in light of the different concepts of legal interests inherent in the concept of crime as a material notion. I argue that the application of the interpretation of the ECJ to crimes against collective interests is insufficiently justified. As a result, the interpretation of ne bis in idem based on material facts appears only partially correct and a sense of distrust seems to be cemented between member states creating obstacles to a successful reform of the principle. Part one attempts to defend that the reasoning put forward by the court lacks relevance and evaluates how this affects mutual trust. Part two analyses this interpretation in the light of different forms of legal interest. Part three examines how later case-law has tried to explain the problematic interpretation of early cases and its relationship with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The article will conclude by summarising the findings which may put into perspective the more general challenges of cooperation in criminal matters within the EU.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Gellér, Balázs, Norbert Kis, and Péter Polt. "Hungarian national report on the principle of ne bis in idem." Revue internationale de droit pénal 73, no. 3 (2002): 989. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ridp.733.0989.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Spinellis, Dionysios. "Global report the ne bis in idem principle in “global” instruments." Revue internationale de droit pénal 73, no. 3 (2002): 1149. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ridp.733.1149.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

윤동호. "Partial Public Prosecution: Object of trial and Ne bis in idem." Journal of Criminal Law 26, no. 3 (September 2014): 179–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.21795/kcla.2014.26.3.179.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!