 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Criminal procedure" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(February 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
| Criminal procedure |
|---|
| Criminal trials and convictions |
| Rights of the accused |
| Rights of the victim |
| Verdict |
| Sentencing |
| Post-sentencing |
| Related areas of law |
| Portals |
|
Criminal procedure is theadjudication process of thecriminal law. While criminal procedure differs dramatically by jurisdiction, the process generally begins with a formalcriminal charge with the person on trial either being free onbail orincarcerated, and results in theconviction oracquittal of thedefendant. Criminal procedure can be either in form of inquisitorial or adversarial criminal procedure.[1]
Currently, in many countries with a democratic system and the rule of law, criminal procedure puts theburden of proof on theprosecution – that is, it is up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, as opposed to having the defence prove that they are innocent, and any doubt is resolved in favor of the defendant. This provision, known as thepresumption of innocence, is required, for example, in the 46 countries that are members of theCouncil of Europe, under Article 6 of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights, and it is included in other human rights documents.[2] However, in practice, it operates somewhat differently in different countries. These basic rights also include the right of the defendant to know the offence for which they have been arrested or charged, and the right to appear before a judicial official within a specified time after arrest. Many jurisdictions also allow the defendant the right to legalcounsel and provide any defendant who cannot afford their ownlawyer with a lawyer paid for at the public expense.
Countries using thecommon law tend to make a clear distinction between civil and criminal procedures. For example, an Englishcriminal court may force a convicted accused to pay a fine to the Crown as punishment for the crime, and sometimes to pay thelegal costs of theprosecution, but does not normally order the convicted accused to pay any compensation to the victim of the crime. The victim must pursue their claim forcompensation in a civil, not a criminal, action.[3] In countries using thecontinental civil law system, such asFrance andItaly, the victim of a crime (known as the "injured party") may be awardeddamages by a criminal courtjudge.
The standards of proof are higher in acriminal action than in a civil one since the loser risks not only financial penalties but also being sent toprison (or, in some countries, execution). InEnglish law, the prosecution must prove the guilt of a criminal "beyond reasonable doubt", while theplaintiff in acivil action is required to prove his case "on the balance of probabilities".[3] "Beyond reasonable doubt" is not defined for the jury which decides the verdict, but it has been said by appeal courts that proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt requires the prosecution to exclude any reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence:Plomp v. R. In acivil case, however, the court simply weighs the evidence and decides what is most probable.
Criminal andcivil procedure are different. Although some systems, including theEnglish, allow a private citizen to bring acriminal prosecution against anothercitizen, criminal actions are nearly always started by thestate.Civil actions, on the other hand, are usually started byindividuals.
In Anglo-American law, the party bringing a criminal action (that is, in most cases, the state) is called theprosecution, but the party bringing a civil action is theplaintiff. In a civil action the other party is known as thedefendant. In a criminal case, the private party may be known as thedefendant or theaccused. A criminal case in theUnited States against a person named Ms. Sanchez would be entitledUnited States v. (short forversus, or against)Sanchez if initiated by the federal government; if brought by a state, the case would typically be calledState v. Sanchez orPeople v. Sanchez. In the United Kingdom, the criminal case would be styledR. (short for Rex or Regina, that is, theKing orQueen)v. Sanchez. In both the United States and the United Kingdom, a civil action between Ms. Sanchez and a Mr. Smith would beSanchez v. Smith if started by Sanchez andSmith v. Sanchez if begun by Smith.
Evidence given at a criminal trial is not necessarily admissible in acivil action about the same matter, just as evidence given in a civil cause is not necessarily admissible on a criminal trial. For example, the victim of a road accident does not directly benefit if the driver who injured him is found guilty of thecrime of careless driving. He still has to prove his case in a civil action.[3] In fact he may be able to prove his civil case even when the driver is found not guilty in the criminal trial. If the accused has given evidence on his trial he may be cross-examined on those statements in a subsequent civil action regardless of the criminal verdict.
Once the plaintiff has shown that the defendant is liable, the main argument in a civil court is about the amount ofmoney, ordamages, which the defendant should pay to the plaintiff.[3]
Proponents of either system tend to consider that their system defends best the rights of the innocent. There is a tendency in common law countries to believe that civil law /inquisitorial systems do not have the so-called "presumption of innocence", and do not provide the defence with adequate rights. Conversely, there is a tendency in countries with an inquisitorial system to believe that accusatorial proceedings unduly favour rich defendants who can afford large legal teams, and therefore disfavour poorer defendants.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 of India
Criminal procedure in the United States
Formal procedure law in Switzerland
Italian Criminal Procedure
Code of Criminal Procedure (Japan)
Criminal Procedure Code (Malaysia)
Criminal Procedure Code (Ukraine)Criminal procedure (investigation) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Criminal investigation | ||
| Criminal prosecution | ||
| Charges and pleas | ||
| Related areas | ||
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
