Chapter 7.5.

👉The table of contents so far is here.

Chapter 7: The System of Litigation Law

7.5. Offences justice system -part 2-

As mentioned last time, if, after the investigation is completed, the suspect expresses his or her intention to contest the alleged facts, the process of clarifying the facts will be entrusted to the Truth Commission, a judicial body that specializes solely in clarifying the facts.

The Truth Commission is a deliberative body of five people: two lawyers (one of whom is the chairperson), one expert specializing in a field other than law, and two ordinary citizen representatives who hold delegate licenses to the Commons' Convention. It is a non-permanent body that is convened whenever necessary based on a request for the Tribune for habeas corpus.

Before the Truth Commission begins its deliberations, a preliminary screening is conducted to organize the evidence. The preliminary investigators inspect the evidence sent by the investigative authorities, and organize only the competent evidence that has been confirmed to be legal, and submit it to the Truth Commission. At that time, the preliminary investigators can summon and interview the suspect, witnesses, and other related parties as necessary.

Since the Truth Commission is not a judicial system to try criminals, but a system purely for clarifying the truth of a case, there are no public prosecutors as prosecutorial professionals, and suspects do not become "defendants" who have filed charges, but remain "suspects" throughout the process.

Thus, the Truth Commission's deliberations do not become an exchange of claims and proofs between the parties as seen in criminal trials, but rather focus on reconstructing the facts based on the evidence submitted. In such cases, suspects are merely summoned and interviewed as witnesses as necessary for the Truth Commission's deliberations.

However, when summoned and interviewed by the Truth Commission, all witnesses, including suspects, may request the assistance of a legally qualified attorney to assist them in their testimony, but the attorney may not testify on their behalf.

The Truth Commission's deliberations are in principle open to the public, but in the case of juvenile cases, they are open only to the parties involved, including relatives, victims, and independent observers selected from third parties.

Once the Truth Commission has completed its deliberations, it will issue a decision setting out the facts that have been clarified. This is equivalent to a verdict in a criminal trial, but rather than being presented in the form of a "guilty" or "not guilty" verdict, it is presented descriptively in the form of a report detailing the truth of the case. Therefore, if it cannot be definitively proven that the suspect is the real perpetrator, he or she will not be found "not guilty" but will instead be described as an unknown perpetrator.

Any suspect who is dissatisfied with the Truth Commission's decision may request a new deliberation from the Tribune for Habeas Corpus. In this case, a second deliberation will be held by members entirely separate from the first Truth Commission, and regardless of the conclusion of that hearing, a third trial cannot be requested.

If the Truth Commission's decision finding the suspect to be the true perpetrator is finalized, the case will then be referred to the Correction and Probation Commission, which decides on the treatment of offenders.

This Commission is a permanent institution composed only of experts in correction and probation, and decides on the most appropriate treatment after scientifically examining the details of the perpetrator's offence, offence history, personality traits, and mental and physical medical history. In the case of juvenile cases, a special review is conducted by the Juvenile Subcommittee of the Correction and Probation Commission, which is composed of experts on juvenile issues.

The Correction and Probation Commission's deliberations are held in private, but the respondent offender may have a lawyer or other person with specialized knowledge of correction and probation assist them as an attendant.

A party who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Correction and Probation Commission may request an appeal review by the Central Board of the Correction and Probation commission, which is the appellate board for the Correction and Probation Commission, but regardless of the conclusion of the Central Board, they cannot request a third trial.

Even after the decision has been finalized, the Correction and Probation Commission will be tasked with following up on the offender from the start of treatment to its completion, and will have the authority to renew treatment terms as well as the authority to supervise and correct the status of treatment implementation. This includes the authority to take necessary supervisory and corrective measures in response to complaints from offenders while treatment is being carried out.

To that extent, the Correction and Probation Commission can be said to be a unique judicial institution with a mission spanning two judicial areas: offences justice and civil protection justice, which is responsible for protecting human rights during the treatment implementation process.

👉The papers published on this blog are meant to expand upon my On Communism.

Chapter 7.4.

👉The table of contents so far is here.

Chapter 7: The System of Litigation Law

7.4. Offences justice system -part 1-

Offences justice system  refers to the field of justice system that aims to clarify illegal acts and take action against those who commit them. It is equivalent to criminal justice in capitalist society, but it is not called "criminal" because communist law does not have a penal system.

Needless to say, the starting point for offences justice  is the clarification of the facts of the offence, but while in the criminal justice process, the clarification of the facts and punishment are usually carried out together in the form of a criminal trial, in offences justice the process of clarifying the facts and the treatment of the offender based on them are clearly distinguished and completely separate. This is because the two processes are essentially completely different.

The beginning of uncovering the facts of an offence is a formal investigation by an investigative agency. Communist investigations are carried out by a dedicated investigative agency, not the police. With the abolition of the monetary economy, there is no class difference between rich and poor, and public safety would be maintained at an extremely stable level in a communist society, so there is no need for a powerful security agency such as the police, and in fact it does not exist (see my article).

If necessary to pursue an investigation, investigative agencies can request the issuance of an arrest warrant or search and seizure warrant from the Tribune for Habeas Corpus, a type of judicial position tasked with protecting the personal safety of citizens, and conduct a compulsory investigation. On the other hand, the Civil Patrollers, who are quasi-public servants whose main task is offence prevention, can also make arrests in the act of committing an offence without a warrant.

A suspect who is taken into custody is immediately summoned to habeas corpus for a public hearing. If it is determined as a result that continued detention is no longer necessary, the Tribune for Habeas Corpus must order the release of the suspect.

Incidentally, if a body is discovered that has died from an unnatural cause other than obvious illness, an autopsy is carried out by the coroner, a public professional independent of the investigative agency. The autopsy results are finally confirmed after a public hearing by a inquest presided over by the Tribune for Habeas Corpus.

Once the investigation is completed, the evidence collected by the investigative agency is temporarily sent to the tribune for Habeas Corpus. The tribune for Habeas Corpus will summon the suspect for questioning again, and if the suspect fully admits to the alleged facts, the case will be sent to the Correction and Probation Commission, which decides how to treat the offender. If the suspect denies all or part of the alleged facts, it will decide to convene the Truth Commission to clarify the facts.

If we compare this with traditional criminal justice, the procedure of indictment by a public prosecutor, which has been standard in the criminal justice process since the Napoleonic Code after the French Revolution, does not exist in communist criminal justice, and as mentioned above, it is a system in which the processes of investigation, fact-finding, and treatment are organically linked through the Tribune for Habeas Corpus.

Furthermore, minor offenses and juvenile delinquency that do not require any measure beyond a warning are dealt with by the Civil Patrollers issuing official written warnings as part of offence prevention activities, and formal investigations are omitted.

👉The papers published on this blog are meant to expand upon my On Communism.