Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Join the forum, it's quick and easy

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Many Topics Including The Oldest Dinar Community. Copyright © 2006-2020


    Federal Supreme Court: The right of legal defense does not permit prejudice to the rights of others

    Rocky
    Rocky
    Admin Assist
    Admin Assist


    Posts : 280306
    Join date : 2012-12-21

    Federal Supreme Court: The right of legal defense does not permit prejudice to the rights of others Empty Federal Supreme Court: The right of legal defense does not permit prejudice to the rights of others

    Post by Rocky Tue 05 Feb 2019, 2:33 am

    Federal Supreme Court: The right of legal defense does not permit prejudice to the rights of others
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    BAGHDAD / The Supreme Federal Court ruled on Tuesday that the use of the right of legal defense does not guarantee the violation of its limits and the violation of the rights of others. The appeal against the unconstitutionality of Article 226 of Penal Code No. 111 of 1969 has been rejected.
    The prosecutor of the court, Ayas al-Samuk, said that "the plaintiff, in the words of his agent in the case, had pleaded in a criminal case as a lawyer for the accused before the Central Criminal Court, in application of the provisions of paragraph (IV) of Article (19) of the Constitution, the field".
    Al-Samok added that "the Central Criminal Court has filed a criminal action against the plaintiff because it attacked the Commission during the hearing in the words of insulting the Commission, and took criminal action against him, and was referred to the competent court to be tried in accordance with Article 226 of the Penal Code."
    He pointed out that "the plaintiff filed his case before the Federal Supreme Court objected to the unconstitutionality of this article because it began in the era of dictatorship, was based in his appeal to the provisions of Article (19 / IV) of the Constitution.
    "The Federal Supreme Court found that article 19 (IV) of the Constitution guaranteed the right of defense at all stages of the investigation and trial, but did not guarantee that the limits of this right were exceeded. The right stands when the person who owns it exceeds the rights of others. "
    "The Supreme Federal Court found that the legislation of Article 226 of the Penal Code, regardless of the time of its legislation does not violate the provisions of the Constitution, and therefore the court decided to respond to the plaintiff's claim not to rely on the Constitution." Finished


    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

      Current date/time is Tue 05 Nov 2024, 1:39 pm