Post by account_disabled on Dec 31, 2023 6:08:44 GMT -5
Aas well as the decisions of the CCR . The Courts decision This is pronounced by a Rejecting as inadmissible the exception of unconstitutionality related to art. of the CPP b Admission of the exception of unconstitutionality of art. of the CPP finding that this article contravenes the constitutional provisions. . Reasoning for the decision For art. The Constitutional Court has the competence to rule among other things on the exceptions of unconstitutionality on the provisions of a law in the present case CPP if it is related to the resolution of the case.
However in the present case a request for recusal of the Country Email List body was not drawn up in order to be able to rule on it. For art. The Court ruled that the procedure for resolving recusal requests the manifestation of will of one of the parties or the prosecutor by which it is requested that the incompatible person not be part of the panel of judges or of the constitution of the court is part part of the court procedure cere presents the concrete way in which justice is carried out by the courts.
This institution of recusal in judicial processes is justified by the imperative of ensuring an impartial judgment. The Court finds that the jurisdiction of the court to rule on the recusal request is removed being exclusively the jurisdiction of the superior hierarchical prosecutor. It does not offer the possibility to the interested party to contest before a court the order of the hierarchical that request. The Court notes that the prosecutor is not part of the judiciary so he cannot rule because justice is done only by the .CCJ and the other courts established by law so the prosecutor does not acquire the powers of the courts. Also no law can remove a competence.
However in the present case a request for recusal of the Country Email List body was not drawn up in order to be able to rule on it. For art. The Court ruled that the procedure for resolving recusal requests the manifestation of will of one of the parties or the prosecutor by which it is requested that the incompatible person not be part of the panel of judges or of the constitution of the court is part part of the court procedure cere presents the concrete way in which justice is carried out by the courts.
This institution of recusal in judicial processes is justified by the imperative of ensuring an impartial judgment. The Court finds that the jurisdiction of the court to rule on the recusal request is removed being exclusively the jurisdiction of the superior hierarchical prosecutor. It does not offer the possibility to the interested party to contest before a court the order of the hierarchical that request. The Court notes that the prosecutor is not part of the judiciary so he cannot rule because justice is done only by the .CCJ and the other courts established by law so the prosecutor does not acquire the powers of the courts. Also no law can remove a competence.