02 Dec RIGHT TO APPEAL IN DEFERMENT OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE VERDICT
CMK’s 231st. the institution of “deferment of the announcement of the verdict”, added to its article by 5560 SY, has been present in Western countries for a long time. The institution has been present in the legal systems of Black Europe since the 1950s. The practice first appeared in Anglo-Saxon law, and then replaced it in the criminal codes of European countries
he found it. For example, in French law, the Law of 02.02.1945 began to be applied in terms of juvenile offenders. Later, with the amendment made in 1975, it also covered adults. Again, with the amendment of the law dated 29.06.1964 in Belgium, the institution of deferment of the announcement of the verdict entered the Belgian legal system.
CMK’s 231st. the fifth paragraph added to Article 5560 with SY is as follows: “If the sentence imposed at the end of the trial for the crime charged to the accused is imprisonment for two years or less or a judicial fine; the court may decide to deferment of the announcement of the verdict. … The withdrawal of the disclosure of the provision means that the established provision does not have any legal consequences for the defendant.”
The institution should be considered in the light of the principles of modern criminal law on the individualization of punishment. One of the most important contributions of the positivist school to the classical criminal school is that it examines the concrete characteristics and state of danger of the person who committed the crime and determines the sanction according to the result of this review. In modern criminal law, the personality traits of an individual who commits a crime, all internal and external causes and motives that lead him to commit a crime are studied,
all measures are taken to eliminate these reasons, and the sanction is also determined in this context. In modern law, execution is aimed not only at general or special prevention: more importantly, it is aimed at restoring the individual who committed the crime to society. The social peace disturbed by crime and the peace and tranquility lost undermine the possibility of social development. This, in turn, weakens the opportunities of the entire society, including the individual who committed the crime, to comprehend the laws of nature and direct the universal course using them, thereby improving social well-being. For this reason, the sanction set for the crime should be directed at restoring the disturbed social peace and tranquility, thereby keeping the possibility of social development open for a long time. The deferment of the announcement of the verdict is also aimed at this purpose. If the judge, examining the personality traits of the individual who committed the crime, finds that the act that constitutes a crime is not a mandatory consequence of his personality traits, but rather an accidental reaction caused by external circumstances, has no tendency to commit new crimes at a later stage of his life, one of the ways he can resort to in terms of personalizing the sanction is the provision
it is to leave it undisclosed.
No Comments