Viktor Bérces: Evidence in Criminal Proceedings
›
Chapter I. Paradigm shifts in the development of evidence in universal law
›
1.3. History of the development of Italian law

1.3. History of the development of Italian law

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

In the initial phase of the development of the Italian city-states, the accusatorial features of the evidentiary procedures continued to dominate (publicity, verbality, immediacy). From the 12th century onwards, however, the so-called clerici (scribes) kept a brief record of the proceedings and the verdict. As a result of this process, from the 13th century onwards, the simultaneous or subsequent preparation of minutes became compulsory in all court proceedings.

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

The characteristics of the procedures from the 13th to the 18th centuries are summarised below:

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

  • the first (investigative) phase was inquisitorial, while the verdict was delivered by the court on the basis of a public, oral and adversarial trial;
  • the judge was free to consider the evidence put before him;
  • in all cases, decisions had to be reasoned.

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Beccaria, a major eighteenth-century jurist, raised again the possibility of introducing juries, while proposing as an old-new rule that jurors should be drawn by lot rather than by appointment. Among other things, the author advocated the introduction of the right of women to testify, sharply criticised the secrecy of the prosecution (investigation), which, in his view, gave rise to serious abuses by the authorities, criticised the institution of torture (in particular, torture interrogation) and stressed the importance of the right of defence.1

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

The subsequent Italian Code of Criminal Procedure (1865), in order to increase the efficiency of the evidentiary procedures and speed up the

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

  • required district judges to conduct a preliminary investigation in all cases and report back to the competent criminal court within 15 days;
  • obliged the judge to pronounce judgment on the day the trial (evidence) was completed;
  • called for speeding up the procedure in less serious cases, which are easier to judge, and
  • excluded the possibility of appealing against fines below a certain threshold or against so-called intermediate or preparatory decisions.2
 

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

In regulating the composition of jury courts, while maintaining the usual conditions of citizenship, political and civil rights, persons under 25 and over 65 years of age were excluded from the jury; so were persons convicted of certain offences; persons deprived of certain rights by a court judgment; illiterate persons; the physically and mentally handicapped; and domestic servants.3
1 Previously, these only operated in Anglo-Saxon jurisdictions. Kisteleki–Lővétei–Nagyné Szegvári–Pomogyi–Rácz ibid. 449.
2 Miskolcziné (2015) ibid. 19.
3 Miskolcziné (2015) ibid. 20.
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