首页> 外文学位 >Post-conviction review of wrongful convictions: A failure to reform.
【24h】

Post-conviction review of wrongful convictions: A failure to reform.

机译:定罪后对不当定罪的审查:改革失败。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Section 696 of the Canadian Criminal Code is an insufficient mechanism to detect and remedy wrongful convictions in Canada. One of the main criticisms of this process is that the Minister of Justice should not be responsible for reviewing alleged wrongful convictions because it is a conflict of interest for the same agency to prosecute criminal offences and also to review them. This thesis compares the independent review commission in the United Kingdom to Canada's section 696 to determine if an independent review commission would improve the current post-conviction review process of handling alleged miscarriages of justice in Canada. The conclusion is that Canada has failed to provide appropriate means to address wrongful conviction cases and that the role of the Minister of Justice under section 696 of the Criminal Code should be replaced with an independent review commission similar to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
机译:《加拿大刑法》第696条没有足够的机制来发现和纠正加拿大的不当定罪。对这一过程的主要批评之一是,司法部长不应负责审查被指控的不法行为,因为同一机构起诉和审查刑事犯罪是利益冲突。本文将英国的独立审查委员会与加拿大的第696节进行了比较,以确定独立审查委员会是否会改善目前定罪后加拿大在处理所谓的司法不公方面的审查程序。结论是,加拿大没有提供适当的手段来解决定罪案件,并且根据《刑法》第696条,司法部长的作用应由类似于刑事案件复审委员会的独立复审委员会代替。

著录项

  • 作者

    Pedersen, Kristy.;

  • 作者单位

    Carleton University (Canada).;

  • 授予单位 Carleton University (Canada).;
  • 学科 Law.
  • 学位 M.A.
  • 年度 2003
  • 页码 162 p.
  • 总页数 162
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 法律;
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:45:14

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号