Procedūrinis teisingumas Lietuvos kriminalinėje justicijoje: monografija
Mykolo Romerio universitetas |
| Date |
|---|
2006 |
Monografijoje analizuojami pastaraisiais metais dešimtmečiais įvairiose šalyse atlikti procedūrinio teisingumo tyrimai, nagrinėjamas mūsų šalies baudžiamojo proceso dalyvių (įtariamųjų ir kaltinamųjų) ikiteisminio tyrimo, teismo proceso, teismų ir įstatymų vertinimas, taip pat šį vertinimą lemiantys psichologiniai veiksniai. Atskleidžiamas, kokiu laipsniu Lietuvos ikiteisminio tyrimo pareigūnų ir teisėjų elgesys atitinka nustaytus procedūrinio teisingumo kriterijus, pateikiamos rekomendacijos, kaip galima didinti jų elgesio atitiktį procedūrinio teisingumo reikalavimams.
The monograph focuses upon the problems of procedural justice. The latter embraces the assessment by lay persons (non - lawyers) of the fairness of the way in which disputes between two parties are solved. The monograph reviews studies of procedural justice carried out within the last several decades and the current state of art. The most important outcome of these investigations seems to be the discovery of a set of fairness criteria which lay people apply when assessing the fairness of procedures used in dispute solution. In the monograph, these criteria are used to assess the criminal procedures applied to the Lithuanian criminal proceeding. The mainstay of our investigation was the original standardized method of observation of judges' behavior. Our method was based upon the observation of the behavior of judges in so called elementary fairness - related court proceeding situations. In these court proceeding situations a judge has only two choices - to follow or to resist demands of the fairness criteria. Judge's actions in these situations were observed and checked by specially trained observers (103 court trials at three city courts and one district court of Vilnius were observed). They used a specially developed List of Criteria situations. The items of the list were the single elementary fairness - related situations and the descriptions of the due action that confirmed the fairness criteria in every situation. During a court proceeding an observer had to observe the behavior of the judge in every criterial situation and to note down whether the judge had preferred the action which met the related fairness criteria. If the action of a judge in a criterial situation agreed with the demands of procedural justice (followed the fairness criteria), then he received an additional item on a scale representing the related criterion of the procedural justice.