LEGAL MEASURES TO RETRIAL CRIMINAL CASES FOR DEATH SENTENCE PRISONERS
Keywords:
Retrial criminal cases, Death Sentence Prisoners, New evidence, Compensation, RemedyAbstract
The purpose of this research were 1) to study the concepts, theories and laws of foreign countries and Thailand in the retrial of criminal cases for Death Sentence Prisoners, 2) to analyze the legal problems in the retrial of criminal cases for Death Sentence Prisoners, and 3) to suggest solutions of problems related to retrial criminal cases for Death Sentence Prisoners. The research model is a qualitative research using international law concepts, theories, and international law measures as a research framework. The interviewees were lecturers, lawyers, correctional officers, prosecutors and judges from 25 persons using the selection method from random sampling. There are two types of research instruments: 1) in-depth interviews and 2) documentary research studies. By doing Random sampling in drawn data analysis and writing a descriptive narrative. The research results were found that
- 1. The retrial of criminal cases for Death Sentence Prisoners in Thailand is inconsistent with the international measures to prevent misleading criminal proceedings.
- 2. The provisions of foreign law are protect the right of Death Sentence Prisoners to retrial specific criminal cases, the definition of the new evidence, suspending the death penalty for a while, compensation and reputation remedies better than the laws of Thailand.
- 3. Thailand must amend that the retrial of criminal cases by granting a specific right to for Death Sentence Prisoners. Adding definitions, suspending the death penalty for a while, compensation and reputation remedies. Therefore, it is in line with the international measures to prevent misleading criminal proceedings.
The findings from the research can be utilized in the amendment to the Retrial of Criminal Cases Act 1983. The research results can then be used to study the retrial of specific criminal cases such as inmates and detainees.
References
พระราชบัญญัติแก้ไขเพิ่มเติมประมวลกฎหมายวิธีพิจารณาความอาญา (ฉบับที่ 23) พ.ศ. 2548. (2548, 8 กุมภาพันธ์). ราชกิจจานุเบกษา. เล่ม 122 ตอนที่ 14ก. หน้า 30-33.
พระราชบัญญัติการรื้อฟื้นคดีอาญาขึ้นพิจารณาใหม่ พ.ศ. 2526. (2526, 7 เมษายน). ราชกิจจานุเบกษา. เล่ม 100 ตอนที่ 55. หน้า 1.
Japanese Law Translation Database System. (2020a). Part IV Retrial Article 442. Retrieved 10 January 2020 from http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?printID=&id=1983&re=02&vm=04.
Japanese Law Translation Database System. (2020b). Part IV Retrial Article 438. Retrieved 10 January 2020, from http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?printID=&id=1983&re=02&vm=04.
Larson, A. (2019). What is Habeas Corpus.Retrieved 20 August 2019, from https://www.expertlaw.com/library/criminal/habeas_corpus.html
Legal Information Institute - Cornell University. (2019). BAZE et al. v. REES, COMMISSIONER, KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al. Retrieved January 10, 2020, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-5439.ZS.html
Lueotchanakun, W. (2007). Personal academic documents Justice Administration Program High level (10th generation), on the role of the prosecutor and the resurrection of the criminal case. Reconsider. Bangkok: College of Justice Office of Justice. (in Thai)
Niyomthai, A. (2017). The principle of resuming criminal cases under consideration Foreign Law. Cul niti, 14(4), 139-147.
The National Court Rules Committee. (2020). Rule 33. New Trial| Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Retrieved January 10, 2020, from https://www.federalrulesofcriminalprocedure.org/title-vii/rule-33-new-trial
The Working Group of the R.O.C Laws & Regulations Database, Ministry of Justice. (2019). Part VIII Execution. Retrieved August 20, 2019 from https://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=C0010001.
US Supreme Court. (2019). Glossip v. Gross 576 US (2015). Retrieved August 20, 2019, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983
