Take part in a one-to-one session and help us improve the FRA website. It will take about 30 minutes of your time.
YES, I AM INTERESTED NO, I AM NOT INTERESTED
Ceartas
Airteagal 50 - An ceart chun nach ndéanfar duine a thriail ná a phionósú faoi dhó in imeachtaí coiriúla i ngeall ar an gcion coiriúil céanna
Ní dhlífear aon duine a thriail ná a phionósú athuair in imeachtaí coiriúla i ngeall ar chion ar éigiontaíodh nó ar ciontaíodh é nó í go críochnaitheach san Aontas i ngeall air cheana i gcomhréir leis an dlí.
Mar seo a leanas atá in Airteagal 4 de Phrótacal Uimh. 7 a ghabhann leis an CECD:
`1. Ní féidir aon duine a thriail ná a phionósú athuair in imeachtaí coiriúla faoin dlínse sa Stát céanna i ngeall ar chion a bhfuil sé éigiontaithe nó ciontaithe go críochnaitheach i ngeall air cheana i gcomhréir leis an dlí agus an nós imeachta coiriúil sa Stát sin.
2. Ní choiscfidh na forálacha sa mhír roimhe seo ar an gcás a athoscailt i gcomhréir leis an dlí agus an nós imeachta coiriúil sa Stát i dtrácht, má tá fianaise nua nó fíorais atá fionnta go nua nó má tá éalang bunúsach sna himeachtaí roimhe sin a d'fhéadfadh fearadh ar an mbreithiúnas a tugadh.
3. Níl aon mhaolú ceadaithe ar an Airteagal seo faoi Airteagal 15 sa Choinbhinsiún.`
Tá feidhm ag riail an `non bis in idem` maidir le dlí an Aontais (féach, i measc na raidhse fasach, breithiúnas an 5 Bealtaine 1996, Cásanna Ceangailte 18/65 agus 35/65, Gutmann v. Coimisiún [1966] ECR 149 agus cás a bhí ann le déanaí, breith ón gCúirt Chéadchéime an 20 Aibreán 1999, Cásanna Ceangailte T305/94 agus eile, Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij NV v. Coimisiún [1999] ECR II-931). Carnadh dhá phionós den chineál céanna atá i gceist sa riail a thoirmisceann an carnadh, eadhon pionóis dlí choiriúil.
I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 50, ní hé amháin go bhfuil feidhm ag riail an `non bis in idem` laistigh de dhlínse aon Stáit amháin ach tá feidhm aici freisin idir dhlínsí roinnt Ballstát. Freagraíonn sé seo don acquis i ndlí an Aontais; féach Airteagail 54 go 58 de Choinbhinsiún Schengen agus breithiúnas na Cúirte Breithiúnais an 11 Feabhra 2003, C–187/01 Gözütok (2003, ECR I-1345), Airteagal 7 den Choinbhinsiún maidir le Leasa Airgeadais na gComhphobal Eorpach a chosaint agus Airteagal 10 den Choinbhinsiún maidir leis an éillitheacht a chomhrac. Na heisceachtaí fíortheoranta atá sna Coinbhinsiúin sin a cheadaíonn do na Ballstáit riail an `non bis in idem` a mhaolú, clúdaítear sa chlásal cothrománach in Airteagal 52(1) den Chairt maidir le teorainneacha iad. Maidir leis na cásanna dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4 de Phrótacal Uimh. 7, eadhon ina ndéantar an prionsabal a chur i bhfeidhm laistigh den Bhallstát céanna, is ionann brí agus raon feidhme don cheart ráthaithe agus don cheart comhfhreagrach sa CECD.
TEIDEAL VII – FORÁLACHA GINEARÁLTA A bhFUIL LÉIRIÚ AGUS CUR I bhFEIDHM NA CAIRTE FAOINA RIALÚ
Article 40 (5) No one may be criminally prosecuted for an act for which she has already been finally convicted or acquitted. This rule shall not preclude the application, in conformity with law, of extraordinary procedures of legal redress.
Článek 40 (5) Nikdo nemůže být trestně stíhán za čin, pro který již byl pravomocně odsouzen nebo zproštěn obžaloby. Tato zásada nevylučuje uplatnění mimořádných opravných prostředků v souladu se zákonem.
Article 31 No one may be sentenced or punished twice for the same criminal offence for which criminal proceedings were dismissed finally, or for which the charge was finally rejected, or for which the person was acquitted or convicted by a final judgement.
31. člen Nihče ne sme biti ponovno obsojen ali kaznovan zaradi kaznivega dejanja, za katero je bil kazenski postopek zoper njega pravnomočno ustavljen, ali je bila obtožba zoper njega pravnomočno zavrnjena, ali je bil s pravnomočno sodbo oproščen ali obsojen.
Article 50 (...) (5) No one may be criminally prosecuted for an act for which he has already been sentenced, or of which he has already been acquitted. This principle does not rule out the application of extraordinary remedies in compliance with the law. (...)
Čl. 50 (...) (5) Nikoho nemožno trestne stíhať za čin, za ktorý bol už právoplatne odsúdený alebo oslobodený spod obžaloby. Táto zásada nevylučuje uplatnenie mimoriadnych opravných prostriedkov v súlade so zákonom.(...)
Artigo 29.º (Aplicação da lei criminal) 5. Ninguém pode ser julgado mais do que uma vez pela prática do mesmo crime.
Article 29 (Application of criminal law) (5) No one may be tried more than once for commission of the same crime.
Article 31. […] No one may be punished twice for the same offence.
31 straipsnis. [...] Niekas negali būti baudžiamas už tą patį nusikaltimą antrą kartą.
In the case of The People (DPP) v Quilligan (No 2) [1989] IR 46, Judge Hency of the Supreme Court stated: 'This rule (or principle), which is sometimes referred to as the rule against double jeopardy, is but an aspect of the canon of fundamental fairness of legal procedures, inherent in our Constitution, which is expressed in the maxim nemo debet bis vexari pro eadem causa.'
XXVIII. cikk (SZABADSÁG ÉS FELELŐSSÉG) […] (6) A jogorvoslat törvényben meghatározott rendkívüli esetei kivételével senki nem vonható büntetőeljárás alá, és nem ítélhető el olyan bűncselekményért, amely miatt Magyarországon vagy – nemzetközi szerződés, illetve az Európai Unió jogi aktusa által meghatározott körben – más államban törvénynek megfelelően már jogerősen felmentették vagy elítélték.
Article XXVIII (Freedom and Responsibility) […] (6) With the exception of extraordinary cases of legal remedy laid down in an Act, no one shall be prosecuted or convicted for a criminal offence for which he or she has already been finally acquitted or convicted in Hungary or, within the scope specified in an international treaty and a legal act of the European Union, in another State, as provided for by an Act.
Artikel 103 (3) No person may be punished for the same act more than once under the general criminal laws.
Artikel 103 (3) Niemand darf wegen derselben Tat auf Grund der allgemeinen Strafgesetze mehrmals bestraft werden.
12(2). A person who has been acquitted or convicted of an offence shall not be tried again for the same offence. No person shall be punished twice for the same act or omission except where death ensues from such act or omission.
12(2). Ο απαλλαγείς ή καταδικασθείς δεν δικάζεται εκ δευτέρου διά το αυτό αδίκημα. Ουδείς τιμωρείται εκ δευτέρου διά την αυτήν πράξιν ή παράλειψιν, εκτός εάν συνεπεία ταύτης προεκλήθη θάνατος.]
Article 31 (2)No one may be re-tried nor penalized in criminal prosecution for an act for which such individual has already been acquitted or sentenced by a binding court judgment in accordance with law. (3)The cases and reasons for the renewal of court proceedings under paragraph (2) of this Article may be stipulated solely by law, in accordance with the Constitution and international treaties.
Članak 31. (2)Nikome se ne može ponovno suditi niti ga se može kazniti u kaznenom postupku za kazneno djelo za koje je već pravomoćno oslobođen ili osuđen u skladu sa zakonom.
(3)Samo se zakonom, u skladu s Ustavom i međunarodnim ugovorom, mogu propisati slučajevi i razlozi za obnovu postupka iz stavka 2. ovoga članka.
Artikel 4 (1) Niemand darf wegen einer strafbaren Handlung, wegen der er bereits nach dem Gesetz und dem Strafverfahrensrecht eines Staates rechtskräftig verurteilt oder freigesprochen worden ist, in einem Strafverfahren desselben Staates erneut vor Gericht gestellt oder bestraft werden.
Preamble: (21) Given the possibility of multiple jurisdictions for cross-border criminal offences falling under the scope of this Directive, the Member States should ensure that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected in full in the application of national law transposing this Directive ... (28) The intended dissuasive effect of the application of criminal law sanctions requires particular caution with regard to fundamental rights. This Directive respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and in particular the right to liberty and security, the protection of personal data, the freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work, the freedom to conduct a business, the right to property, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence and the right of defence, the principles of the legality and proportionality of criminal offences and sanctions, as well as the principle of ne bis in idem. This Directive seeks to ensure full respect for those rights and principles and must be implemented accordingly.
Preamble: (17) The principle of ne bis in idem is a fundamental principle of law in the Union, as recognised by the Charter and developed by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Therefore the executing authority should be entitled to refuse the execution of an EIO if its execution would be contrary to that principle. Given the preliminary nature of the proceedings underlying an EIO, its execution should not be subject to refusal where it is aimed to establish whether a possible conflict with the ne bis in idem principle exists, or where the issuing authority has provided assurances that the evidence transferred as a result of the execution of the EIO would not be used to prosecute or impose a sanction on a person whose case has been finally disposed of in another Member State for the same facts. ... Article 11. Grounds for non-recognition or non-execution: 1. Without prejudice to Article 1(4), recognition or execution of an EIO may be refused in the executing State where: ... (d) the execution of the EIO would be contrary to the principle of ne bis in idem
Preamble: (23) The scope of this Directive is determined in such a way as to complement, and ensure the effective implementation of, Regulation (EU) No 596/2014. Whereas offences should be punishable under this Directive when committed intentionally and at least in serious cases, sanctions for breaches of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 do not require that intent is proven or that they are qualified as serious. In the application of national law transposing this Directive, Member States should ensure that the imposition of criminal sanctions for offences in accordance with this Directive and of administrative sanctions in accordance with the Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 does not lead to a breach of the principle of ne bis in idem.
