Post by account_disabled on Dec 24, 2023 6:42:37 GMT 2
A and of the CPP. In this case the appellant criticizes either the solution of returning the case to the prosecutors office based on art. paragraph of the CPP or the solution of ordering the start of the trial under the conditions of art. paragraph when the chamber judge preliminary court found irregularities in the indictment but assessed that they do not affect the possibility of establishing the object and limits of the trial or excluded one or more administered evidence or invalidated certain criminal prosecution documents.
The Court notes that erroneously art. para. of the CPP in the wording prior Country Email List to the amendment by Law no. refers speaking about solutions to art. para. under the conditions that the latter legal text does not include any provision regarding any solution but provides that Excluded evidence cannot be taken into account in the judgment on the merits of the case. From the corroboration of the provisions of art. para. with those of art. para. of theLaw no. the conclusion is drawn that the conclusion by which the judge of the preliminary chamber starts.
Ordering the trial under the conditions in which he found that no requests and exceptions were made nor did he raise ex officio exceptions is not subject to appeal . Therefore the appeal against the conclusion pronounced by the preliminary chamber judge under art. para. of the CPP is inadmissibleFinally to exhaust the analysis of the provisions of art. para. of the CPP in the wording prior to the amendment by Law no. in view of the possibility of challenging the solutions provided for in art. the Court considers that no appeal can be filed even against the conclusion of declining jurisdiction conclusion.
The Court notes that erroneously art. para. of the CPP in the wording prior Country Email List to the amendment by Law no. refers speaking about solutions to art. para. under the conditions that the latter legal text does not include any provision regarding any solution but provides that Excluded evidence cannot be taken into account in the judgment on the merits of the case. From the corroboration of the provisions of art. para. with those of art. para. of theLaw no. the conclusion is drawn that the conclusion by which the judge of the preliminary chamber starts.
Ordering the trial under the conditions in which he found that no requests and exceptions were made nor did he raise ex officio exceptions is not subject to appeal . Therefore the appeal against the conclusion pronounced by the preliminary chamber judge under art. para. of the CPP is inadmissibleFinally to exhaust the analysis of the provisions of art. para. of the CPP in the wording prior to the amendment by Law no. in view of the possibility of challenging the solutions provided for in art. the Court considers that no appeal can be filed even against the conclusion of declining jurisdiction conclusion.