Victim´s right to discuss the decision of not going to trial in the pre-trial stage of the procedure. The case of Spain, Colombia and USA.
Keywords:
Criminal procedure, victims, victim’s rights, preliminary hearing, comparative method.Abstract
The faculties of the victims to discuss a decision of not going to trial, in the pre-trial phase of criminal procedures, from Spain, Colombia and the United States, are compared in this paper. To accomplish that goal, using a functional approach to comparative law, first, the concrete procedural phases to be compared are identified, and then, the faculties of the victims in these scenarios are described, using each criminal procedure structure and the concept of victim in each context as frameworks. Finally, comparison is executed identifying advantages and disadvantages of each model.
Author Biography
Camilo Alberto Quintero Jiménez, Fundación Universitaria Juan de Castellanos
Abogado, M.Sc en Derecho. Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Ph.D(c) en Derecho. Universidad Pompeu Fabra, Docente Fundación Universitaria Juan de Castellanos.
References
Bergman, P. and Berman-Barret, S. J. (2003). The criminal law handbook. Berkeley, USA: Nolo.
De Vergottini, G. (2005). Derecho Constitucional Comparado. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad.
Dressler, J. and Michaels A. (2010). Understanding criminal procedure. Vol I. Investigation. Dansvers, United States of America: LexisNexis.
Fernandez Fustes, M. D. (2004). La intervención de la víctima en el proceso penal. Valencia, España: Tirant lo Blanch.
Fletcher, George P. (1998). Comparative Law as a Subversive Discipline. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 46(4), 683-700. Recuperado de: http://www.jstor.org/stable/840986
House of representatives. (2010). Hearing before the subcomittee on crimeterrorism and homeland security of the committee on the judiciary houseof representatives – one hundred eleventh congress – First session –September 29 2009. Recuperado de: http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pur1.32754081259404;view=1up;seq=1
LópezBarja, J. (2012). Tratado de Derecho Procesal Penal –Tomo II. Pamplona, España: Aranzadi.
Pound, R. (1966). The spirit of the common law. Boston, United States of America: Beacon Press.
STATUTES AND CASE LAW.
SPAIN
Statutes
Ley de enjuiciamiento criminal. (Real decreto de 14 de septiembre de 1882) Recuperado de: https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-1882-6036
Estatuto de la víctimadeldelito. (Ley 4/2015) Recuperado de: http://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2015-4606
EUROPEAN UNION
Statutes
Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union of 25 October 2012. Recuperado de: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32012L0029
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Statutes
Federal rules of criminal procedure. Recuperado de: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp
US code. Title 18, Part II, Chapter 237, Crime VictimsRights. Recuperado de: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-II/chapter-237
Case Law.
In re de Henriquez, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 18024 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 16, 2015). Recuperado de: http://academic.lexisnexis.nl.sare.upf.edu/
United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114 (1979). Recuperado de: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/442/114/case.html
COLOMBIA
Statutes
Constitución Política de Colombia. [Const] (1991). Recuperado de: http://www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=4125
Congreso de la República. (19 de diciembre de 2002).[ActoLegislativo 03 de 2002 ]. DO: 45.040. Recuperado de: http://www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=6679
Código de Procedimiento Penal. [Código]. (Ley 906 de 2004) (2016). Recuperado de: http://www.secretariasenado.gov.co/senado/basedoc/ley_0906_2004.html
Case Law
Corte Constitucional, (21 de marzo de 2007). C-209/07.[MP. Cepeda Espinoza Manuel José] Recuperado de: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/relatoria/2007/c-209-07.htm
Corte Constitucional, (11 de julio de 2007). C-516/07. [MP. Córdoba Triviño Jaime] Recuperado de: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/RELATORIA/2007/C-516-07.htm
Corte Constitucional, (24 de agosto de 2010). C-648/10.[MP. Sierra Porto Humberto Antonio] Recuperado de: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/RELATORIA/2010/C-648-10.htm
Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala de Casación Penal, (15 de julio de 2008) Auto Rad. 29994. [MP.BustosMartínez José Leonidas] Recuperado de: http://190.24.134.94/Busquedadoc/qfullhit.htw?CiWebHitsFile=%2fsentencias%2fpenal%2f2008%2fdr.jose+leonidas+bustos+martinez%2fjulio%2f29994%2815-07-08%29.doc&CiRestriction=%2229994%22&CiQueryFile=/busquedadoc/query.idq&CiUserParam3=query.htm&CiHiliteType=Full
De Vergottini, G. (2005). Derecho Constitucional Comparado. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad.
Dressler, J. and Michaels A. (2010). Understanding criminal procedure. Vol I. Investigation. Dansvers, United States of America: LexisNexis.
Fernandez Fustes, M. D. (2004). La intervención de la víctima en el proceso penal. Valencia, España: Tirant lo Blanch.
Fletcher, George P. (1998). Comparative Law as a Subversive Discipline. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 46(4), 683-700. Recuperado de: http://www.jstor.org/stable/840986
House of representatives. (2010). Hearing before the subcomittee on crimeterrorism and homeland security of the committee on the judiciary houseof representatives – one hundred eleventh congress – First session –September 29 2009. Recuperado de: http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pur1.32754081259404;view=1up;seq=1
LópezBarja, J. (2012). Tratado de Derecho Procesal Penal –Tomo II. Pamplona, España: Aranzadi.
Pound, R. (1966). The spirit of the common law. Boston, United States of America: Beacon Press.
STATUTES AND CASE LAW.
SPAIN
Statutes
Ley de enjuiciamiento criminal. (Real decreto de 14 de septiembre de 1882) Recuperado de: https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-1882-6036
Estatuto de la víctimadeldelito. (Ley 4/2015) Recuperado de: http://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2015-4606
EUROPEAN UNION
Statutes
Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union of 25 October 2012. Recuperado de: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32012L0029
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Statutes
Federal rules of criminal procedure. Recuperado de: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp
US code. Title 18, Part II, Chapter 237, Crime VictimsRights. Recuperado de: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-II/chapter-237
Case Law.
In re de Henriquez, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 18024 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 16, 2015). Recuperado de: http://academic.lexisnexis.nl.sare.upf.edu/
United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114 (1979). Recuperado de: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/442/114/case.html
COLOMBIA
Statutes
Constitución Política de Colombia. [Const] (1991). Recuperado de: http://www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=4125
Congreso de la República. (19 de diciembre de 2002).[ActoLegislativo 03 de 2002 ]. DO: 45.040. Recuperado de: http://www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=6679
Código de Procedimiento Penal. [Código]. (Ley 906 de 2004) (2016). Recuperado de: http://www.secretariasenado.gov.co/senado/basedoc/ley_0906_2004.html
Case Law
Corte Constitucional, (21 de marzo de 2007). C-209/07.[MP. Cepeda Espinoza Manuel José] Recuperado de: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/relatoria/2007/c-209-07.htm
Corte Constitucional, (11 de julio de 2007). C-516/07. [MP. Córdoba Triviño Jaime] Recuperado de: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/RELATORIA/2007/C-516-07.htm
Corte Constitucional, (24 de agosto de 2010). C-648/10.[MP. Sierra Porto Humberto Antonio] Recuperado de: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/RELATORIA/2010/C-648-10.htm
Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala de Casación Penal, (15 de julio de 2008) Auto Rad. 29994. [MP.BustosMartínez José Leonidas] Recuperado de: http://190.24.134.94/Busquedadoc/qfullhit.htw?CiWebHitsFile=%2fsentencias%2fpenal%2f2008%2fdr.jose+leonidas+bustos+martinez%2fjulio%2f29994%2815-07-08%29.doc&CiRestriction=%2229994%22&CiQueryFile=/busquedadoc/query.idq&CiUserParam3=query.htm&CiHiliteType=Full
How to Cite
Quintero Jiménez, C. A. (2015). Victim´s right to discuss the decision of not going to trial in the pre-trial stage of the procedure. The case of Spain, Colombia and USA. Global Iure, 3, 93–116. Retrieved from https://revista.jdc.edu.co/index.php/giure/article/view/262
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Downloads
Published
2015-11-30
Issue
Section
Artículo de reflexión
