Criminal procedure - Revision history

Manikmusicscapgk: Improved article clarity and structure

2025-10-17T23:03:16Z

Improved article clarity and structure

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:33, 18 October 2025
Line 4:		Line 4:
	{{Criminal procedure (trial)}}		{{Criminal procedure (trial)}}
	{{Rights}}		{{Rights}}
	'''Criminal procedure''' is the [[adjudication]] process of the [[criminal law]]. While criminal procedure differs dramatically by jurisdiction, the process generally begins with a formal [[criminal charge]] with the person on trial either being free on [[bail]] or [[incarcerated]], and results in the [[Conviction (law)\|conviction]] or [[acquittal]] of the [[defendant]]. Criminal procedure can be either in form of inquisitorial or adversarial criminal procedure.		'''Criminal procedure''' is the [[adjudication]] process of the [[criminal law]]. While criminal procedure differs dramatically by jurisdiction, the process generally begins with a formal [[criminal charge]] with the person on trial either being free on [[bail]] or [[incarcerated]], and results in the [[Conviction (law)\|conviction]] or [[acquittal]] of the [[defendant]]. Criminal procedure can be either in form of inquisitorial or adversarial criminal procedure.<ref>{{Cite book \|last1=Antonino \|first1=Galati \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BOAm0AEACAAJ \|title=Diritto processuale penale \|last2=Tranchina \|first2=Giovanni \|last3=Zappalà \|first3=Vincenzo \|date=2023 \|publisher=Giuffrè \|isbn=978-88-288-5157-8 \|language=it}}</ref>

	==Basic rights==		==Basic rights==
	Currently, in many countries with a democratic system and the rule of law, criminal procedure puts the [[Legal burden of proof\|burden of proof]] on the [[prosecution]] – that is, it is up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, as opposed to having the ~~defense~~ prove that they are innocent, and any doubt is resolved in favor of the defendant. This provision, known as the [[presumption of innocence]], is required, for example, in the 46 countries that are members of the [[Council of Europe]], under Article 6 of the [[European Convention on Human Rights]], and it is included in other human rights documents. However, in practice, it operates somewhat differently in different countries. ~~Such~~ basic rights also include the right ~~for~~ the defendant to know ~~what~~ offence ~~he or she has~~ been arrested ~~for~~ or ~~is being~~ charged ~~with~~, and the right to appear before a judicial official within a ~~certain~~ time ~~of being arrested~~. Many jurisdictions also allow the defendant the right to legal [[counsel]] and provide any defendant who cannot afford their own [[lawyer]] with a lawyer paid for at the public expense.		Currently, in many countries with a democratic system and the rule of law, criminal procedure puts the [[Legal burden of proof\|burden of proof]] on the [[prosecution]] – that is, it is up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, as opposed to having the defence prove that they are innocent, and any doubt is resolved in favor of the defendant. This provision, known as the [[presumption of innocence]], is required, for example, in the 46 countries that are members of the [[Council of Europe]], under Article 6 of the [[European Convention on Human Rights]], and it is included in other human rights documents.<ref>{{cite web \|year=2014 \|title=Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights – Right to a fair trial (criminal limb) \|url=https://rm.coe.int/1680304c4e \|publisher=Council of Europe \|page=10}}</ref> However, in practice, it operates somewhat differently in different countries. These basic rights also include the right of the defendant to know the offence for which they have been arrested or charged, and the right to appear before a judicial official within a specified time after arrest. Many jurisdictions also allow the defendant the right to legal [[counsel]] and provide any defendant who cannot afford their own [[lawyer]] with a lawyer paid for at the public expense.

	==Difference in criminal and civil ~~procedures~~==		==Difference between criminal and civil cases==
	~~Most countries~~ make a ~~rather~~ clear distinction between civil and criminal procedures. For example, an ~~[[England\|~~English]] [[Criminal law\|criminal court]] may force a ~~defendant~~ to pay a fine as punishment for ~~his~~ crime, and ~~he may~~ sometimes ~~have~~ to pay the [[legal costs]] of the [[prosecution]]~~. But~~ the victim of the [[crime~~]] pursues his~~ claim for [[Damages\|compensation]] in a civil, not a criminal, action.<ref name = "law1"/> In [[France]], [[Italy]]~~, and many countries besides~~, the victim of a crime (known as the "injured party") may be awarded [[damages]] by a ~~[[Criminal law\|~~criminal court]] [[judge]].		Countries using the [[common law]] tend to make a clear distinction between civil and criminal procedures. For example, an English [[Criminal law\|criminal court]] may force a convicted accused to pay a fine to the Crown as punishment for the crime, and sometimes to pay the [[legal costs]] of the [[prosecution]], but does not normally order the convicted accused to pay any compensation to the victim of the crime. The victim must pursue their claim for [[Damages\|compensation]] in a civil, not a criminal, action.<ref name = "law1"/> In countries using the [[Civil law (legal system)\|continental civil law system]], such as [[France]] and [[Italy]], the victim of a crime (known as the "injured party") may be awarded [[damages]] by a criminal court [[judge]].

	The standards of proof are higher in a [[criminal action]] than in a civil one since the loser risks not only financial penalties but also being sent to [[prison]] (or, in some countries, execution). In [[English law]] the prosecution must prove the guilt of a criminal "beyond reasonable doubt"~~; but~~ the [[plaintiff]] in a [[civil action]] is required to prove his case "on the balance of probabilities".<ref name = "law1"/> "Beyond reasonable doubt" is not defined for the jury which decides the verdict, but it has been said by appeal courts that proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt requires the prosecution to exclude any reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence: ''Plomp v. R''. In a [[civil case]], however, the court simply weighs the evidence and decides what is most probable.		The standards of proof are higher in a [[criminal action]] than in a civil one since the loser risks not only financial penalties but also being sent to [[prison]] (or, in some countries, execution). In [[English law]], the prosecution must prove the guilt of a criminal "beyond reasonable doubt", while the [[plaintiff]] in a [[civil action]] is required to prove his case "on the balance of probabilities".<ref name = "law1"/> "Beyond reasonable doubt" is not defined for the jury which decides the verdict, but it has been said by appeal courts that proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt requires the prosecution to exclude any reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence: ''Plomp v. R''. In a [[civil case]], however, the court simply weighs the evidence and decides what is most probable.

	Criminal and [[civil procedure]] are different. Although some systems, including the [[England\|English]], allow a private citizen to bring a [[criminal prosecution]] against another [[citizen]], criminal actions are nearly always started by the [[State (law)\|state]]. [[Civil action]]s, on the other hand, are usually started by [[individual]]s.		Criminal and [[civil procedure]] are different. Although some systems, including the [[England\|English]], allow a private citizen to bring a [[criminal prosecution]] against another [[citizen]], criminal actions are nearly always started by the [[State (law)\|state]]. [[Civil action]]s, on the other hand, are usually started by [[individual]]s.
Line 36:		Line 36:
	* [[Criminal Procedure Act]]		* [[Criminal Procedure Act]]
	*{{Flagicon\|United States}} [[Criminal procedure in the United States]]		*{{Flagicon\|United States}} [[Criminal procedure in the United States]]
			*{{Flagicon\|Switzerland}} [[Formal procedure law in Switzerland]]
	*{{Flagicon\|Italy}} [[Italian Criminal Procedure]]		*{{Flagicon\|Italy}} [[Italian Criminal Procedure]]
	*{{Flagicon\|Japan}} [[Code of Criminal Procedure (Japan)]]		*{{Flagicon\|Japan}} [[Code of Criminal Procedure (Japan)]]

Ajay Kumar: Criminal procedure

2023-08-12T06:44:08Z

Criminal procedure

New page

{{short description|Adjudication process in criminal law}}
{{redirect|Criminal case|game|Criminal Case (video game)}}
{{more citations needed|date=February 2015}}
{{Criminal procedure (trial)}}
{{Rights}}
'''Criminal procedure''' is the [[adjudication]] process of the [[criminal law]]. While criminal procedure differs dramatically by jurisdiction, the process generally begins with a formal [[criminal charge]] with the person on trial either being free on [[bail]] or [[incarcerated]], and results in the [[Conviction (law)|conviction]] or [[acquittal]] of the [[defendant]]. Criminal procedure can be either in form of inquisitorial or adversarial criminal procedure.

==Basic rights==
Currently, in many countries with a democratic system and the rule of law, criminal procedure puts the [[Legal burden of proof|burden of proof]] on the [[prosecution]] – that is, it is up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, as opposed to having the defense prove that they are innocent, and any doubt is resolved in favor of the defendant. This provision, known as the [[presumption of innocence]], is required, for example, in the 46 countries that are members of the [[Council of Europe]], under Article 6 of the [[European Convention on Human Rights]], and it is included in other human rights documents. However, in practice, it operates somewhat differently in different countries. Such basic rights also include the right for the defendant to know what offence he or she has been arrested for or is being charged with, and the right to appear before a judicial official within a certain time of being arrested. Many jurisdictions also allow the defendant the right to legal [[counsel]] and provide any defendant who cannot afford their own [[lawyer]] with a lawyer paid for at the public expense.

==Difference in criminal and civil procedures==
Most countries make a rather clear distinction between civil and criminal procedures. For example, an [[England|English]] [[Criminal law|criminal court]] may force a defendant to pay a fine as punishment for his crime, and he may sometimes have to pay the [[legal costs]] of the [[prosecution]]. But the victim of the [[crime]] pursues his claim for [[Damages|compensation]] in a civil, not a criminal, action.<ref name = "law1"/> In [[France]], [[Italy]], and many countries besides, the victim of a crime (known as the "injured party") may be awarded [[damages]] by a [[Criminal law|criminal court]] [[judge]].

The standards of proof are higher in a [[criminal action]] than in a civil one since the loser risks not only financial penalties but also being sent to [[prison]] (or, in some countries, execution). In [[English law]] the prosecution must prove the guilt of a criminal "beyond reasonable doubt"; but the [[plaintiff]] in a [[civil action]] is required to prove his case "on the balance of probabilities".<ref name = "law1"/> "Beyond reasonable doubt" is not defined for the jury which decides the verdict, but it has been said by appeal courts that proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt requires the prosecution to exclude any reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence: ''Plomp v. R''. In a [[civil case]], however, the court simply weighs the evidence and decides what is most probable.

Criminal and [[civil procedure]] are different. Although some systems, including the [[England|English]], allow a private citizen to bring a [[criminal prosecution]] against another [[citizen]], criminal actions are nearly always started by the [[State (law)|state]]. [[Civil action]]s, on the other hand, are usually started by [[individual]]s.

In Anglo-American law, the party bringing a criminal action (that is, in most cases, the state) is called the '''prosecution''', but the party bringing a civil action is the '''plaintiff'''. In a civil action the other party is known as the '''defendant'''. In a criminal case, the private party may be known as the ''defendant'' or the ''accused''. A criminal case in the [[United States]] against a person named Ms. Sanchez would be entitled ''United States v.'' (short for ''versus'', or against) ''Sanchez'' if initiated by the federal government; if brought by a state, the case would typically be called ''State v. Sanchez'' or ''People v. Sanchez.'' In the United Kingdom, the criminal case would be styled ''R.'' (short for Rex or Regina, that is, the [[King]] or [[Queen regnant|Queen]]) ''v. Sanchez.'' In both the United States and the United Kingdom, a civil action between Ms. Sanchez and a Mr. Smith would be ''Sanchez v. Smith'' if started by Sanchez and ''Smith v. Sanchez'' if begun by Smith.

Evidence given at a criminal trial is not necessarily admissible in a [[civil action]] about the same matter, just as evidence given in a civil cause is not necessarily admissible on a criminal trial. For example, the victim of a road accident does not directly benefit if the driver who injured him is found guilty of the [[crime]] of careless driving. He still has to prove his case in a civil action.<ref name = "law1"/> In fact he may be able to prove his civil case even when the driver is found not guilty in the criminal trial. If the accused has given evidence on his trial he may be cross-examined on those statements in a subsequent civil action regardless of the criminal verdict.

Once the plaintiff has shown that the defendant is liable, the main argument in a civil court is about the amount of [[money]], or '''[[damages]]''', which the defendant should pay to the plaintiff.<ref name="law1">{{cite book |author=Richard Powell|title=Law today|publisher=Longman|location=Harlow|year=1993 |pages=34|isbn=9780582056350|oclc=30075861}}</ref>

==Differences between civil law and common law systems==
* The majority of [[civil law (legal system)|civil law]] jurisdictions ('civil law' as a type of law system, not as opposed to criminal law) follow an [[inquisitorial system]] of adjudication, in which judges undertake an active investigation of the claims by examining the evidence at the trial (while other judges contribute likewise by preparing reports).
* In [[common law]] systems, the trial judge presides over proceedings grounded in the [[adversarial system]] of [[dispute resolution]], where both the prosecution and the defence prepare arguments to be presented before the court. Some civil law systems have adopted adversarial procedures.

Proponents of either system tend to consider that their system defends best the rights of the innocent. There is a tendency in common law countries to believe that civil law / [[inquisitorial system]]s do not have the so-called "[[presumption of innocence]]", and do not provide the defence with adequate rights. Conversely, there is a tendency in countries with an inquisitorial system to believe that accusatorial proceedings unduly favour rich defendants who can afford large legal teams, and therefore disfavour poorer defendants.

==See also==
* [[Offence (law)]]
* [[Trial (law)]]
* [[Civil procedure]]
*{{Flagicon|India}} [[Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973]] of India
* [[Court Appointed Special Advocates]]
* [[Criminal Procedure Act]]
*{{Flagicon|United States}} [[Criminal procedure in the United States]]
*{{Flagicon|Italy}} [[Italian Criminal Procedure]]
*{{Flagicon|Japan}} [[Code of Criminal Procedure (Japan)]]
*{{Flagicon|Malaysia}} [[Criminal Procedure Code (Malaysia)]]
*{{Flagicon|Ukraine}} [[Criminal Procedure Code (Ukraine)]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Further reading==
*{{cite book |title=Criminal Procedure and the Constitution: Leading Supreme Court Cases and Introductory Text |last=Israel |first=Jerold H. |author2=Kamisar, Yale |author3=LaFave, Wayne R. |year=2003 |publisher=West Publishing |location=St. Paul, MN |isbn=0-314-14669-5 }}

{{Criminal procedure}}
{{Law}}

{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Criminal procedure| ]]