Viktor Bérces: Evidence in Criminal Proceedings
›
Chapter XII. The evidentiary features of juridical proceedings in each of the special procedures
›
12.7. The judicial phase of private prosecutions
›
12.7.1. Personal interview as a specific case of trial preparation

12.7.1. Personal interview as a specific case of trial preparation

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

If the court measures detailed above are not justified or have been taken by the court or the prosecution, the court will hold a meeting (personal hearing) to hear the parties concerned in person. The function of this procedural act is twofold: (1) to attempt to reconcile the parties and (2) to prepare for the trial. Among its general rules, the following should be highlighted:

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

  1. The presence of the victim and the accused, as well as the prosecutor if the prosecution has taken over the representation of the case, is mandatory.1 In view of the personal nature of the proceedings, the Be. provides for justified legal consequences in relation to the exercise of the right of presence of the victim (complainant). On this basis, a complaint is deemed to be withdrawn if the victim (1) fails to appear at the hearing without providing a well-grounded excuse in advance and without delay or becomes unavailable; (2) due to his or her own fault, appears in a condition rendering him or her unable to perform his or her procedural obligations; or (3) leaves the place of the procedural act without permission.2 However, the proceedings shall not be terminated if the victim has provided a well-grounded excuse in advance for his or her absence or if he or she did not appear at the personal interview because he or she was summoned to appear at the wrong address.3
  2. The presence of a guardian is not compulsory.4 I would note, however, that if the person charged has an authorised defender, he or she can play a serious role in challenging the credibility of the charge as soon as the summons5 is issued. However, a common problem in this respect is that the power of attorney is only granted immediately before the personal hearing, which means that there is less time to get to know the legal and factual basis of the case and to clarify the defence tactical issues.
  3. The rules on the rights and obligations of a person reasonably suspected of having committed a criminal offence shall apply mutatis mutandis to the person reported. 6
  4. The procedure involves the following steps:
    • the court establishes the identity of the victim and the accused, explains the substance of the accusation and, if the conditions are met, warns the accused of the possibility of a counterclaim;7
    • the court will attempt to reconcile the victim and the accused; if reconciliation fails, the victim will continue to participate in the proceedings as a private prosecutor and the accused as a defendant;
    • if the defendant countersues, the court will also hear the private prosecutor as a defendant;
    • the court shall invite the private prosecutor and, in the case of a counterprosecution, the accused to indicate the means of proof and the facts to be proved; at the invitation of the court, the accused and the defence may also indicate the means of proof to be used in support of their defence (the court may set a time limit of fifteen days for this);
    • the court shall terminate the proceedings if (1) the victim withdraws the complaint, (2) the victim’s failure to do so is deemed to be a withdrawal of the complaint, or (3) the victim and the complainant are reconciled at the personal interview.8
1 If there is more than one victim in the case, all victims must be present at the personal interview. The representative of the victim may be present at the personal interview [§768 (1)].
2 § 768 (3) para.
3 BH 1976.241.
4 § 768 (1a) para.
5 The complainant shall be cited by referring to the name of the victim and the essence of the offence [§768 (4)].
6 768. § (1a)
7 I would note that in many cases this warning is justified, as it is often the case that the parties are abusive to each other or, for example, defamatory, but only one of them presses charges. In such cases, the other party can file a counterclaim, which will result in both parties being accused, i.e. both of them will be subject to an evidentiary hearing. The private accuser often only faces the prospect of being convicted after the counteraccusation has been lodged. This usually results in the withdrawal of the charges (dropping of the accusation).
8 769–771. §§
chevron_left
chevron_right
Tartalomjegyzék navigate_next
Keresés a kiadványban navigate_next
A kereséshez, kérjük, lépj be!
Könyvjelzőim navigate_next
A könyvjelzők használatához
be kell jelentkezned.
Jegyzeteim navigate_next
Jegyzetek létrehozásához
be kell jelentkezned.
    Kiemeléseim navigate_next
    Mutasd a szövegben:
    Szűrés:
    Kiemelések létrehozásához
    MeRSZ+ előfizetés szükséges.
      Útmutató elindítása
      delete
      Kivonat
      fullscreenclose
      printsave