Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/161 |
Resumo: | The analysis of the prosecutorial inquiry in Italian criminal proceedings displays a complex scenario. In spite of the progressive enhancement of participatory rights of private parties, the overwhelming role of the investigative authorities does not set the necessary conditions for effective equality of arms, while largely frustrating the tasks of the judiciary. To a great extent, the maintenance of several decision-making and coercive powers of the public prosecutor still largely reflect the old conception of an independent body of justice. Even though the individuals involved in the prosecutorial inquiry are ensured participation in a number of police and prosecutorial investigations, legal assistance often lacks effectiveness, and the possibilities of defence lawyers conducting autonomous investigations are scant and only achieve a formal level of par condicio. Certainly, this set-up cannot be justified in a human rights-oriented model of criminal justice. De lege ferenda, the enhancement of the tasks of competent judge for the pre-trial inquiry, who under Italian law is not an investigative magistrate but is called upon to ensure the proper fulfilment of procedural safeguards, appears to constitute today the best alternative to one-sided investigations and the dominant role of the investigative authorities. |
id |
IBRASPP-1_6eff78654a94038ececc29158f61357d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.revista.ibraspp.com.br:article/161 |
network_acronym_str |
IBRASPP-1 |
network_name_str |
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justiceParidade de armas, imparcialidade do Judiciário e o papel das partes na investigação preliminar: a perspectiva da justiça criminal italianaEquality of armsjudicial impartialitypre-trial inquiryItalian criminal justice.Paridade de armasimparcialidade judicialinvestigação preliminarjustiça criminal italiana.The analysis of the prosecutorial inquiry in Italian criminal proceedings displays a complex scenario. In spite of the progressive enhancement of participatory rights of private parties, the overwhelming role of the investigative authorities does not set the necessary conditions for effective equality of arms, while largely frustrating the tasks of the judiciary. To a great extent, the maintenance of several decision-making and coercive powers of the public prosecutor still largely reflect the old conception of an independent body of justice. Even though the individuals involved in the prosecutorial inquiry are ensured participation in a number of police and prosecutorial investigations, legal assistance often lacks effectiveness, and the possibilities of defence lawyers conducting autonomous investigations are scant and only achieve a formal level of par condicio. Certainly, this set-up cannot be justified in a human rights-oriented model of criminal justice. De lege ferenda, the enhancement of the tasks of competent judge for the pre-trial inquiry, who under Italian law is not an investigative magistrate but is called upon to ensure the proper fulfilment of procedural safeguards, appears to constitute today the best alternative to one-sided investigations and the dominant role of the investigative authorities. A análise da investigação pelo Ministério Público no processo penal italiano apresenta um cenário complexo. Apesar do aumento progressivo dos direitos de participação das partes, o papel imenso das autoridades investigativas não determina as condições para a efetividade da paridade de armas, e também prejudica amplamente as tarefas do julgador. Em grande medida, a conservação de vários poderes decisórios e coercitivos do Ministério Público ainda refletem a antiga concepção de um independente membro de Justiça. Ainda que os indivíduos envolvidos na investigação ministerial possam participar em alguns atos policiais e do Ministério Público, a defesa técnica em muitas vezes carece de efetividade, e as possibilidades de investigações autônomas por advogados de defesa são limitadas e somente determinam uma igualdade em nível formal. Certamente, esse cenário não pode ser justificado em um modelo de justiça criminal orientado por direitos humanos. De lege ferenda, o aumento das tarefas do juiz competente para a investigação preliminar, que sistema italiano de justiça penal não é um juiz instrutor, mas um juiz de garantias, mostra-se atualmente como a melhor alternativa em relação a investigações unilaterais e o papel dominante de autoridades investigativas.Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP2018-06-17info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/16110.22197/rbdpp.v4i2.161Brazilian Journal of Criminal Procedure; Vol. 4 No. 2 (2018); 559-603Revista Brasileña de Derecho Procesal Penal; Vol. 4 Núm. 2 (2018); 559-603Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; V. 4 N. 2 (2018); 559-603Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; v. 4 n. 2 (2018); 559-6032525-510X10.22197/rbdpp.v4i2reponame:Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)instacron:IBRASPPenghttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/161/121Copyright (c) 2018 Stefano Ruggeriinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessRuggeri, Stefano2018-06-17T21:16:42Zoai:ojs.revista.ibraspp.com.br:article/161Revistahttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPPONGhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/oairevista@ibraspp.com.br2525-510X2359-3881opendoar:2018-06-17T21:16:42Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice Paridade de armas, imparcialidade do Judiciário e o papel das partes na investigação preliminar: a perspectiva da justiça criminal italiana |
title |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice |
spellingShingle |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice Ruggeri, Stefano Equality of arms judicial impartiality pre-trial inquiry Italian criminal justice. Paridade de armas imparcialidade judicial investigação preliminar justiça criminal italiana. |
title_short |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice |
title_full |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice |
title_fullStr |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice |
title_full_unstemmed |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice |
title_sort |
Equality of arms, impartiality of the judiciary and the role of the parties in the pre-trial inquiry: the perspective of Italian criminal justice |
author |
Ruggeri, Stefano |
author_facet |
Ruggeri, Stefano |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ruggeri, Stefano |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Equality of arms judicial impartiality pre-trial inquiry Italian criminal justice. Paridade de armas imparcialidade judicial investigação preliminar justiça criminal italiana. |
topic |
Equality of arms judicial impartiality pre-trial inquiry Italian criminal justice. Paridade de armas imparcialidade judicial investigação preliminar justiça criminal italiana. |
description |
The analysis of the prosecutorial inquiry in Italian criminal proceedings displays a complex scenario. In spite of the progressive enhancement of participatory rights of private parties, the overwhelming role of the investigative authorities does not set the necessary conditions for effective equality of arms, while largely frustrating the tasks of the judiciary. To a great extent, the maintenance of several decision-making and coercive powers of the public prosecutor still largely reflect the old conception of an independent body of justice. Even though the individuals involved in the prosecutorial inquiry are ensured participation in a number of police and prosecutorial investigations, legal assistance often lacks effectiveness, and the possibilities of defence lawyers conducting autonomous investigations are scant and only achieve a formal level of par condicio. Certainly, this set-up cannot be justified in a human rights-oriented model of criminal justice. De lege ferenda, the enhancement of the tasks of competent judge for the pre-trial inquiry, who under Italian law is not an investigative magistrate but is called upon to ensure the proper fulfilment of procedural safeguards, appears to constitute today the best alternative to one-sided investigations and the dominant role of the investigative authorities. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-06-17 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/161 10.22197/rbdpp.v4i2.161 |
url |
https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/161 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.22197/rbdpp.v4i2.161 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/161/121 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2018 Stefano Ruggeri info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2018 Stefano Ruggeri |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Journal of Criminal Procedure; Vol. 4 No. 2 (2018); 559-603 Revista Brasileña de Derecho Procesal Penal; Vol. 4 Núm. 2 (2018); 559-603 Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; V. 4 N. 2 (2018); 559-603 Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; v. 4 n. 2 (2018); 559-603 2525-510X 10.22197/rbdpp.v4i2 reponame:Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP) instacron:IBRASPP |
instname_str |
Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP) |
instacron_str |
IBRASPP |
institution |
IBRASPP |
reponame_str |
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) |
collection |
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revista@ibraspp.com.br |
_version_ |
1809281939991953408 |