How Many Minutes Do We Gain

The Alakrana Estoppel and obligation to prosecute crimes

Guybrush Threepwood, the most famous pirate of all time.

Hello family! "I missed you had?

For almost two weeks since I wrote, and this I noticed me and what I imagine you also will notice you. We agree, we can not get along without learning something new law. First of all, you deserve an explanation of why he I write has been missing for two weeks. Well, as I imagine most of you already know, I've moved to a College in Madrid and have been very busy this week with moving and getting the issues of meeting with the opposition and language trainers and all that Easter . As if this were not enough, I have no Internet in the room, which I plug every once in a while and does not plan to monopolize the only computer that runs the whole school. This is being a bit of a shock therapy after my addiction to the Internet during my two months off. Anyway, let that not what we have all day.

I promised two weeks ago, when the crisis was at its peak, a post on Alakrana. To not break my word, and as in any case it's Alakrana served me an excuse to treat a purely legal issue (better we get into politics), here we go. Summarizing much the theme: Somali pirates hijacked a few tuna, the "Alakrana" I know not how many sailors aboard, and the government failed to release three or four days ago, after much trouble. Part of the problem was that the navy had managed to detain two of the pirates, who in fact had been brought to Spain to stand trial for crimes against physical integrity sailors and of kidnapping and such. I wanted to speak about it today.

and in Spain, so I have understood, in most of continental Europe, governs the principle of legality (that silly has 200 different meanings), which is to say the following in what we now interests: If the prosecutor (who has been the case) think about the evidence they are who may have committed a crime, is obliged to investigate and bring him before the magistrate. So when the Navy stopped the two pirates, and data were available, there was evidence of a crime, the prosecutor was required (I never tire of underline) investigar el crimen. España no podía, por lo tanto, simplemente liberar a los dos piratas y devolverlos a Somalia, ya que eran sospechosos en una investigación en curso. Se barajaron bastantes opciones, pero en cualquier caso tenían un percal considerable.

¿Esto es así en todas partes? Pues no señor. En EEUU, sin ir más lejos, funcionan de un modo completamente distinto: el fiscal (attorney, si no me equivoco) tiene mucho margen para decidir si investiga o no un caso , además de que se le elige mediante elección popular. El ejemplo más claro es aquél en que el fiscal no acusa a alguien de la mafia que está dispuesto a declarar en contra de los jefazos. We've all seen a thousand series and American films in which this is clear. So, what would have happened with the U.S. Alakrana? It is hard to say (do not negotiate with terrorists, son), but at least they could have left the two pirates free without having to tear their clothes.

I will not come to appreciate if one of the two systems is better than another because: a) this post is already long enough, and b) as a teacher of mine said, "that in the end are cultural things." In any case, what do you think? What is more practical? What is fair?

I have some issues on international treaties that you will love. Early in the doctrine (no, just kidding).

A guard!

What Kind Of Trainer Are You Platinum

Small differences (III) The impartiality of the judge

Hello!

Newsflash: I moved to the College next Thursday, in a week. I probably go to Madrid a few days before to prepare the ground (look for furnishings and such), but in any case has reached the moment of truth: the opposition is closer than ever. What a relief!

We already ours. I want to make a post about the abduction of Alakrana, but I have some doubts about the terminology that prevents me at the moment, so instead I bring you the third installment of the small differences ( here first and second here) with two terms of those that fit you like it or not after 4 years of career, and raise real. Best start for "real", which is more complicated and left it easy for the end. If you do not like, what you say and edit in a moment.

1. Real. In the language of everyday "real" can mean two things. The first is q ue is about king, queen or the institution of the monarchy in general, so we talked about the Royal House, Real Madrid or peacock. The second definition refers to a Quelle is tangible or perceptible, and opposes a fictional . So I can say that the computer from which I write is real, and that unicorns are not. Details lexical and philosophical considerations aside, this is more or less the normal definition of "real."

And what right? Nothing to do, ma'am. The most used meaning in law is that which comes from the Latin res , or thing, and is opposed to "personal" . It makes sense, then, the classical division students crushed us every year between real rights and personal rights. And now to see how you explain me what are the real rights in three liarme sentences without too ... Let's see. Real rights are those that are linked to real (or things) specific example being the basic and fundamental property. They are often opposable erga omne s and also tend to be listed in public records. Mother, that no one can understand. I better give you an example.

Imagine that I own a flat. My right is real because it is projected on the floor in particular is in the Land Registry and is enforceable against third parties. Now imagine that I do a lease with Manolo floor and then sold it to John. John, radiant in his new apartment, comes and sees that Manolo has seized the room. The right of Manolo to be on the floor is not real, but that is personal, because it derives from a contract that transfers the floor. Ie John Manolo can not tell you anything, even if a contract for 5 years and have only spent one, because he had no idea that the contract even existed. If instead of a lease would have been a usufruct (soon more on this word) for Manolo, the right has been registered in the Register and John could not throw a Manolo the floor until it was extinguished. Conclusion: This is a calico that do and will need a post devoted exclusively to this. Some school registrar or notary find to enlighten us.

2. Source. A source is, in the vernacular, a place from which water flows, a spring.

speak In right, again and again, "the sources of law X" where X can be any area of \u200b\u200blaw you can think of: labor, international, civil, criminal, administrative, constitutional and so on. Here "source" has the sense of origin, the process by which the rules are accepted as such valid. Important to retain: varies, more or less, depending on the area. The collective agreement is a source of labor law but not international For example, although the treaty may be on the other hand sources of employment law. And I better not see that we are dangerously close to the philosophy of law, undermined field where they exist.

torture you leave already. Soon

post on Alakrana promised.

Where To Buy Jockstrap Kuala Lumpur

THE CHALLENGE OF VOCAL II

As I said in the previous article. 2 members recused Institutions of the Fifth Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima, on reasonable grounds (Art. 31 of the C. of P. P) for doubting his impartiality. Was accompanied by the evidence thereof (instrumental) which demonstrate that our motives founded. An objection is a right of individuals, was responsible. Be it resolved by the members of the Sixth Criminal Court. There just in front.

This objection was raised, three before the hearing of the case (dl inc.2 C. PP Art.34 as amended by Leg. 959). The Collegiate responsible for dealing with the challenge, with unusual speed, issuing its order declaring that UNFOUNDED Challenge. Here the problem. The Chamber admitted the challenge, but I did not run VISTA HIGHER TAX. Notified of the decision of the Board, in accordance with law and with the receipt of payment of the respective rate, we propose Appeal. Why, because there is a plurality instance (inc 6 of Article 139 of the Constitution of the State. Art. 11 and Orderly Unique Text of the Organic Law of Judicial Power. Art.X Preliminary Title Code of Civil Procedure). But they know that the Board resolved? Issued a resolution saying that suited our appeal, as if out of Nullity ????. Please where we are in the Andromeda?

What should make the Hall, was run Vista Prosecutor. Then decide. Report, and against our appeal, grant the appeal as being pointed to above. But no. As the vocals are awesome. We wanted to force us to accept that ours was INVALIDITY and no appeal???. And wonder who are the procedural rules? Are not mandatory under functional responsibility?. And it's the constitutional standard is above another lower-level standard. What has violated this Court is that trampled the procedural and constitutional standards, not having granted our appeal, and force us to tricks, to accept their absurd positions. In the end they got their way, saying that we had not accompanied the receipt of payment of court fees, even though my client was the defendant, not plaintiff. Compared to this unique decisiciones tosuda Criminal Division, pose for rejecting complaint Exceptional Invalidity. And said no.

Now I wonder who will defend these judges?

Well. Here what has been committed is a crime of malfeasance flgrante. This is because the Board has decided contrary to the law Festina process. In compliance with the Plurality of Instance, should increase the appeal file to the Supreme Criminal Court Act But call it. They are the judges and the rule applied under the circumstances. According to the names of the lawyers, because if the appellant had been a large, well-known example Nakasaki if they had formed the book challenge and would have gone to the Supreme Criminal Salal. Now we are waiting for resolution Finally, on the appeal of the acquittal that favors my client. Not attend the hearing of the case by two judges to be disqualified as mentioned before. We will see that resolved. But it certainly will not allow in any way, pardon the redundancy to any defense, non-Haute or economic power. The law is to enforce it. Did not say that all are equal before the law? Finally I ask, because there will be rotated Judge Vidal Morales fifth dla Criminal Chamber? And the constituents of the Sixth Criminal Court has made this legicidio be punished? Amen.

Lifefitness Elliptical Calorie

Hello family!

As I said in my last post that I contested to go to Madrid does not mean that you are going to leave without doctrine, and here is proof. Before entering the rag with the fundamental issue of today you can see in the title, a small personal note: I'm in Barcelona, \u200b\u200bI estimate the move will be late next week or early next. After so long without much to do seems to have reached the moment of truth. Hallelujah!

The impartiality of the judge is a huge issue in law, and I think everyone, right shysters as we lay in more or less internalized. Apart from its importance, there is another reason that leads me to write on this subject just now: This is a news I read recently in the Daily Mail, which is said to from now in the United Kingdom judges no longer have to state whether they are Freemasons or not. In addition and more easy to understand why it is said that "justice is blind" and is often represented blindfolded. I am so, do you want ... Let

a couple of thoughts about the fairness in general and how it is ensured before realizing why it is relevant to the case I mentioned above. Well, judges are responsible primarily to resolve conflicts. They are by no means the only way to solve the brown people, and in fact the lawyers often recommend let the judges out of trouble as long as possible ("prosecute the conflict" in leguleyo), in other words, is far better to agree to bring a case before the judge (time, money and physical and mental health in general).

When the agreement is not possible between the parties is when the judge takes action, which basically is nothing more than a third person who has the ability to enforce its decisions (which may embargarte current account, go .) No, I lie, it's much more than that, but for the purposes of this post this definition and we better. Then of course, if he is going to solve the conflict is an outsider at the same interest that we really may have nothing , otherwise it gets "justice and" effective remedy "in 24 CE? In all, you have said.

Very quickly, the mechanisms to avoid bias or to ensure fairness (which you like best) are basically two: the challenge and abstention. In the first the plaintiff or the defendant tells the judge "you can not judge this case because it is associated, for better or for worse, with one of us and therefore can not be impartial." The difference with the abstention, as ye shall have guessed, is that in this he says the above are not the parts but the same judge. Causes allow disqualification or abstention: vid. 219 LOPJ art. Not go into all the roll of judge predetermined by law or crimes of trespass because it never ends.

And to stop why the example of the principle. What of the Masons is important because it is a judge's secret status, so it is very difficult for the parties know that it is given. Ie, it is relatively easy to know if the judge if I have a hobby or a relative or BFF other, but if both are Masons is very difficult to get to know me, hence the registration.

I leave you with a photo of the statue of justice of the Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa. There is blindfolded, but it seems equally impressive.

Soon more!

Dental Mistress In Leather

doctrine will Madriz

Ladies and gentlemen! Children! The moment everyone was waiting for has arrived! Your

particular doctrine has finally received the call that summons in the capital of the kingdom to begin with the opposition. Do not go thinking that abandon you and that you are going to be without such source of knowledge, that's nothing. In short, the whole issue of refresh rate, such as what we will see progress. For now, I leave you with a few images of the capital.

Finally!

All very good, very imperial.

In a separate note today, and that does not say that here there we speak of law, Vaclav Klaus, Czech President has finally signed the Treaty of Lisbon. It seems to come into force in December this year.

A treatment!