<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The objective of the paper is to present the differences in the grounds of appeal and the appeal proceedings against judgments issued by a court composed of representatives of the public in a criminal trial at first instance. At present, citizens are allowed to adjudicate most often in one of three forms: persons adjudicating independently without the participation of a professional factor, who are not professionals in the field of law and criminal procedure (e.g. judges of the peace in the common law system); a jury composed of citizens and adjudicating mostly on guilt of the accused; or lay judges adjudicating all aspects of the case in one panel together with professional judges. However, the participation of laymen in adjudication is not a prevailing rule. Many countries legal systems do not allow the citizens to co-decide in criminal cases. The paper also indicates the arguments for the democratization of the judiciary through a wider admission of citizens to participate in criminal justice. This issue has been examined on the background of three aspects of democracy: representative, deliberative and participatory.</p></abstract>

The objective of the paper is to present the differences in the grounds of appeal and the appeal proceedings against judgments issued by a court composed of representatives of the public in a criminal trial at first instance. At present, citizens are allowed to adjudicate most often in one of three forms: persons adjudicating independently without the participation of a professional factor, who are not professionals in the field of law and criminal procedure (e.g. judges of the peace in the common law system); a jury composed of citizens and adjudicating mostly on guilt of the accused; or lay judges adjudicating all aspects of the case in one panel together with professional judges. However, the participation of laymen in adjudication is not a prevailing rule. Many countries legal systems do not allow the citizens to co-decide in criminal cases. The paper also indicates the arguments for the democratization of the judiciary through a wider admission of citizens to participate in criminal justice. This issue has been examined on the background of three aspects of democracy: representative, deliberative and participatory.

Appealing the Judgments Issued in Criminal Trial with the Participation of Lay Judges in Poland and Jury in England

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

The objective of the paper is to present the differences in the grounds of appeal and the appeal proceedings against judgments issued by a court composed of...

Appealing the Judgments Issued in Criminal Trial with the Participation of Lay Judges in Poland and Jury in England

Pubblicato online: 10 gen 2020

Pagine: 85 - 96

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2019-0030

Parole chiave
democracy, criminal trial, appeal proceedings, lay judge, jury

© 2019 Dariusz Kużelewski, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Appealing the Judgments Issued in Criminal Trial with the Participation of Lay Judges in Poland and Jury in England

Pubblicato online: 10 gen 2020

Pagine: 85 - 96

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2019-0030

Parole chiavedemocracy, criminal trial, appeal proceedings, lay judge, jury

© 2019 Dariusz Kużelewski, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Parole chiave
democracy, criminal trial, appeal proceedings, lay judge, jury