首页> 外文OA文献 >Court-provided trial technology : efficiency and fairness for criminal trials
【2h】

Court-provided trial technology : efficiency and fairness for criminal trials

机译:法院提供的审判技术:刑事审判的效率和公正性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

In Australia, trials conducted as 'electronic trials' have ordinarily run with the assistance of commercial service providers, with the associated costs being borne by the parties. However, an innovative approach has been taken by the courts in Queensland. In October 2007 Queensland became the first Australian jurisdiction to develop its own court-provided technology, to facilitate the conduct of an electronic trial. This technology was first used in the conduct of civil trials. The use of the technology in the civil sphere highlighted its benefits and, more significantly, demonstrated the potential to achieve much greater efficiencies. The Queensland courts have now gone further, using the court-provided technology in the high proffle criminal trial of R v Hargraves, Hargraves and Stoten, in which the three accused were tried for conspiracy to defraud the Commonwealth of Australia of about $3.7 million in tax. This paper explains the technology employed in this case and reports on the perspectives of all of the participants in the process. The representatives for all parties involved in this trial acknowledged, without reservation, that the use of the technology at trial produced considerable overall efficiencies and costs savings. The experience in this trial also demonstrates that the benefits of trial technology for the criminal justice process are greater than those for civil litigation. It shows that, when skilfully employed, trial technology presents opportunities to enhance the fairness of trials for accused persons. The paper urges governments, courts and the judiciary in all jurisdictions to continue their efforts to promote change, and to introduce mechanisms to facilitate more broadly a shift from the entrenched paper-based approach to both criminal and civil procedure to one which embraces more broadly the enormous benefits trial technology has to offer.
机译:在澳大利亚,通常以“电子审判”形式进行的审判是在商业服务提供商的协助下进行的,相关费用由当事方承担。但是,昆士兰州的法院采用了一种创新的方法。 2007年10月,昆士兰州成为澳大利亚第一个开发自己的法院提供的技术以促进进行电子审判的辖区。该技术首先用于民事审判。该技术在民用领域的使用突出了其好处,更重要的是,它展示了实现更高效率的潜力。昆士兰州法院现在已走得更远,在R v Hargraves,Hargraves和Stoten的高级别刑事审判中使用法院提供的技术,其中三名被告因串谋诈骗澳大利亚联邦共计约370万美元的税款而受审。 。本文解释了这种情况下使用的技术,并报告了该过程中所有参与者的观点。参与该试验的所有各方的代表毫无保留地承认,在试验中使用该技术产生了可观的总体效率并节省了成本。这次审判的经验还表明,审判技术对刑事司法程序的好处大于对民事诉讼的好处。它表明,熟练地使用审判技术为提高被告的审判公正性提供了机会。该文件敦促所有司法管辖区的政府,法院和司法部门继续努力促进变革,并引入各种机制,以促进从根深蒂固的基于纸件的方法转变为刑事和民事诉讼程序,再到涵盖更广泛的方法。试用技术必须提供巨大的好处。

著录项

  • 作者

    Jackson Sheryl;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2010
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 {"code":"en","name":"English","id":9}
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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