Third party’s objection in the criminal court (A Critical review of the unanimous decision No. 818 of the Supreme Court)

Message:
Article Type:
Research/Original Article (بدون رتبه معتبر)
Abstract:

The third party’s objection before the criminal court was considered as one of the controversial issues in the jurisprudence (judicial procedure). Some criminal judges accepted the third party’s objection to the written judgment in the property restitution section and dealt with the matter as a civil judge; while others believed in the principle of inherent jurisdiction between legal and criminal courts and considered the third party’s objection to be exclusive to the legal court. The challenge of accepting or not accepting the third objection was caused by the legislator's approach to some specific crimes in which the judge of the criminal court is obliged to issue a judgment to make restitution without a petition.On the one hand, one legal verdict on the issue of making restitution or the like is issued by a criminal authority without presenting a petition and as specified by some legal articles, and on the other hand, the acceptance of a third party’s objection depends on the existence of a full legal dispute. In some countries, such as Italy, it is mandatory to file a full civil lawsuit before the criminal court, and unlike Iran's proceedings, there is no distinction between crimes. With the approval of the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court No. 818, the dispute was resolved in the jurisprudence and the third party’s objection was considered to be within the jurisdiction of the criminal court. There are various objections to the unanimous decision, including the fact that the principle of inherent and specialized jurisdiction has been ignored. Also, based on the unanimous decision of the criminal court, it must deal with a third party’s objection litigation that has not been based on a fully processed legal lawsuit before, and sometimes it is created simply because a line is written in the judgment of the criminal court whose mission and purpose is something else. On the other hand, it seems that articles such as Article 111 of the Criminal Procedure Law have been neglected in issuing judgments by the Supreme Court.

Language:
Persian
Published:
Journal of Judgment, Volume:21 Issue: 105, 2023
Pages:
55 to 77
magiran.com/p2564814  
دانلود و مطالعه متن این مقاله با یکی از روشهای زیر امکان پذیر است:
اشتراک شخصی
با عضویت و پرداخت آنلاین حق اشتراک یک‌ساله به مبلغ 1,390,000ريال می‌توانید 70 عنوان مطلب دانلود کنید!
اشتراک سازمانی
به کتابخانه دانشگاه یا محل کار خود پیشنهاد کنید تا اشتراک سازمانی این پایگاه را برای دسترسی نامحدود همه کاربران به متن مطالب تهیه نمایند!
توجه!
  • حق عضویت دریافتی صرف حمایت از نشریات عضو و نگهداری، تکمیل و توسعه مگیران می‌شود.
  • پرداخت حق اشتراک و دانلود مقالات اجازه بازنشر آن در سایر رسانه‌های چاپی و دیجیتال را به کاربر نمی‌دهد.
In order to view content subscription is required

Personal subscription
Subscribe magiran.com for 70 € euros via PayPal and download 70 articles during a year.
Organization subscription
Please contact us to subscribe your university or library for unlimited access!