Poręczenie i dozór społeczny w postępowaniu karnym
Loading...
Date
1983
Authors
Advisor
Editor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM
Title alternative
The pledge and social surveillance in penal proceedings
Abstract
Polish penal law provides pledge and surveillance of social institutions,
organizations and . collective groups under which defendant or the sentenced
person: works, receives an education or is in the military service. These
measures can be of a litigious or probational character. The litigious pledge is
a preventive means aiming at securing the appearance of the defendant at summons
before the organs conducting the proceedings and preventing his obstruction
of a process. It cannot be geared on resocializing the defendant as there is a principle
of presumption of the accused's innocence hold valid in the penal proceedings,
as long as a perpetration of a crime is not established in the final judgement
starting upon a resocialization of the defendant will be untimely. The
pledge as a probational means is aimed, on the other hand, at the resocialization.
The litigious pledge is applied in the course of proceedings and for its duration
unless it was limited to a certain stage of a process. It is terminated, at the
latest by the final completion of proceedings while the pledge as a probational
means is ruled at the conditional discontinuance of proceedings, conditional suspension
of the enforcement of punishment and release on licence, it is undertaken
for the time of testing a favorable behavior of perpetrator of a crime. A social
organization, institution or a collective body which are undertaking a pledge
have to appoint a person to perform the duties of a pledger directly.
Surveillance is in principle a probational means. It can be applied as
the litigious means of prevention only by the way of an exception, in case of
stay of execution of a judgement pertinent to an extraordinary appeal against
a valid judgement or a motion for instituting a trial de novo. A difference between
the pledge and surveillance is not clear. The pledge is not limited itself to standing
surety for the accused or the sentenced. It is related, as in the instance of the
suryeillance, to the duties to control a conduct of the pledgee. Yet, the duties of
surveilling person are regulated in a wider scope and more precisely. Theoreticians
are advancing a proposition that a pledge is more flexible and less binding form
of control.
The pledge and surveillance are terminated upon the expiration of a probation
period, earlier m the case of releasing a pledger from his duties and also
in the instance of a final ruling of the enforcement of punishment or recalling
a release on licence. The pledge expires also upon the reopening of conditionally
discontinued proceedings.
The social pledge — litigious and probational — is not often used in practice
and so is the social surveillance performed by the social institutions and collective
groups. Surveillance by court appointed curators (mostly social ones) is
dominating.
Description
Sponsor
Digitalizacja i deponowanie archiwalnych zeszytów RPEiS sfinansowane przez MNiSW w ramach realizacji umowy nr 541/P-DUN/2016
Keywords
Citation
Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny 45, 1983, z. 3, s. 17-28
Seria
ISBN
ISSN
0035-9629