Search results

This translation of an original Chinese language work by Xiao Yongzhen discusses the legal authority Chinese courts rely on in addressing economic disputes arising from foreign investment and joint-venture agreements in the People's Republic of China. The translation details specific legal mechanisms used in China, as well as distinct Chinese legislation and practices relied upon to amicably resolve contractual disputes between private parties involving foreign interests in China. Translators' Introductory Note: The style of Chinese law review articles differs somewhat from that of American law reviews; therefore this translation should be read with those differences in mind. Chinese law review articles tend to be more expository rather than analytical as compared to American law reviews. Writing in the context of a civil law system, Chinese legal scholars rarely cite case law as authority. Constitutional and statutory authorities are commonly cited within the text of the article rather than through footnotes. The original text of this article does not contain any footnotes. Footnotes have been added by the translators to clarify or explain certain ambiguities in the text, provide specific citations, and to offer further information.

International migration has intensified during the last two decades. Europe has been receiving increasing number of migrants from the developing countries (primarily from the Near-East). The number of the irregular migrants entered the European Union reached unprecedented levels in the last four years. The mentioned phenomenon affected the European Union and the Member States as well. The irregular migration is defined and managed in different ways by the Member States. In 2015, when Hungary was in the centre of the migratory flow, a political decision on taking the necessary criminal measures to stop the irregular migrants was made by the Hungarian Government. The legal response concerned widely the Hungarian legal system. In the centre of the amendment were the criminal law and the criminal procedure law. Within the frame of the mentioned decision the Hungarian Criminal Code was amended with three new crimes which are the followings: damaging the border barrier, unlawful crossing the border barrier and obstruction of the construction work on border barrier. The above-mentioned amendment modified the general section of the Criminal Code as well concerning the irregular migration. The aim of the paper is to present on the one hand the solution of the Hungarian criminal law with special reference to the new statutory definitions using the analytical method and on the other hand the data of the Hungarian criminal-statistics as well. However, it shall be underlined that in our paper we could work only with the offical criminal-statistics for 2015-2017 because until the finishing of our study the Unified Hungarian Criminal Statistic of the Investigation Authorities and Prosecution did not summarize yet the data concerns the year of 2018.

Greek philosophers had accepted "rule of law" as desired governance system since it was the only way to provide all citizens' public interest. In today's societies where public policy is accountable for the interests of total society or at least its majority, it is too vital to recognize the concept of public interest. Like other concepts, it is also radically transformed in modern age, despite varied perceptions on this concept, modern concept of public interest is understood as recognizing individual rights, accepting utility principle which means to attract the highest interest for most people, respecting legal process and adapting with common values of society independent of individual interests.Criminal procedure is shaped in three main areas including criminal process, entities and its governing laws affected by public interest concept. Regulations such as competencies and penal provisional remedy, entities like the public prosecutor's office and NGOs and criminal process models like crime control are all justified by this concept. In present paper, it is attempted to adapt such claim to Iranian procedural rights by some illuminations.One can claim that criminal procedure is one of the most obvious arenas of public interest where individual rights and freedoms clash. Since criminal procedure is set to provide public interest like many other laws, it also supports individual rights. Such rights include both procedural and substantial rights. On this basis, criminal procedure aims at achieving a balance point between public interest and individual interest. Here, we study the challenge of four rights supported by criminal procedure on public interest in Iranian laws.

Subject of this publication is torture as an interrogational instrument in criminal proceedings from a legal history point of view. Thereby, the author makes a distinction between torturing the accused on the one hand and, on the other hand, torture as an instrument to force a witness' incriminating testimony against third parties (in German: Zeugenfolter), torture as a means to avert dangers (lifesaving torture), torture as an additional cruelty to the accused's punishment (in German: Straffolter), and corporal punishment for lying in court. Only the first manifestation, namely torturing the accused intending to extort his confession, is the real subject of this paper. Volume I covers the following historical periods: Code of Hammurabi; Germanic Law; Roman Law; Age of the Kingdom of the Franks; High Middle Ages.

The article describes the phenomenon of singularity in criminal law, as well as its impact on the effectiveness of criminal sanctions. It is noted that the crisis of criminal law policy has led to the emergence of extremely dangerous trends. One of these is the singularity of criminal law. The article defi nes this as a modern phenomenon in criminal law that refl ects its crisis. It is pointed out that the term «singularity», which is widely used in physics, philosophy, and mathematics, can be used in criminal law to generalise the boundaries beyond which it seems poorly possible or impossible to describe phenomena in terms of current representation and understanding. Attention is drawn to the position of scientists who point to the absorption of positive criminal law by the anti-law within the framework of the singularity state. Emphasis is placed on leveling traditional criminal law institutions such as sanctions, punishment, and their preventive, protective, and punitive effects. The infl uence of the singularity on the effectiveness of criminal sanctions is shown. It is emphasised that globalisation in social networks generates a new phenomenon of parallel criminal law impact.

In the evolution of the comparative Law, the tendency to accept criminal responsibility of legal entities has been accentuated, due to the necessities of transformation of the criminal policy and the influence of the European Union. This evidences a confl ; En la evolución del Derecho comparado se ha acentuado la tendencia a aceptar, en razón de las necesidades de transformación de la política criminal y de las influencias de la Unión Europea, la responsabilidad penal de las personas jurídicas, lo cual entra