كلية القانون - دكتوراه
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://repository.neelain.edu.sd/handle/123456789/1057
Browse
5 results
Search Results
Item أسباب الإعفاء من المسؤولية الجنائية في القانون الجنائي لسنة 1991م "دراسة مقارنة"(جامعة النيلين, 2021) ياسر عبد الوكيل بخيت جيلانيالمستخلص المسؤولية الجنائية هي عبارة عن التزام قانوني مفاده تحمل آثار الجريمة وهي مسؤولية شخصية لا تنسحب للغير ولا تنهض إلا إذا كان الفاعل مدركاً ومختاراً للفعل عند ارتكابه. ترتبط أسباب الإعفاء من المسؤولية الجنائية بالركن المعنوي، وهي لا ترفع عن الفعل وصف الجريمة، وتنقسم في الفقه الجنائي إلى أسباب مرتبطة بعنصر الإدراك وهي صغر السن والجنون والعاهة العقلية والسكر الاضطراري وأخري متعلقة بعنصر الاختيار وهي الإكراه والضرورة والخطأ في الوقائع. وقد حاول الباحث تغطية أهم الجوانب التشريعية والفقهية المرتبطة بالمسؤولية الجنائية واتبع في سبيل ذلك المنهج الوصفي والتحليلي والاستقرائي المقارن والتاريخي. تتلخص مشكلة هذا البحث في التعارض بين قانون الطفل لسنة )2010( والقانون الجنائي لسنة) 1991( وفي مدي تأثير حالة المرض العقلي والنفسي والسكر والتخدير علي المسؤولية الجنائية وفي تحديد نطاق الدفع بالإكراه والضرورة. وقد توصل الباحث إلي عدد من النتائج والتوصيات أهمها، أن المشرع السوداني قد خلط بين أسباب الإعفاء من المسؤولية الجنائية وأسباب الإباحة عندما أستعمل صياغة "لا يعد مرتكباً جريمة" وأيضاً وجود تعارض بين القانون الجنائي لسنة )1991( وقانون الطفل لسنة )2010) فيما يتعلق بسن المسؤولية الجنائية والتدابير التي توقع على الطفل الجانح. وجاءت أهم التوصيات في أعادة صياغة النصوص المتعلقة بأسباب الإعفاء من المسؤولية الجنائية لتبدأ بعبارة "لا يسأل جنائياً" بدلاً من عبارة "لا يعد مرتكباً جريمة" لأنها الصياغة التي تتفق مع الطبيعة القانونية لتلك الأسباب، فهي لا ترفع صفة التجريم عن الفعل كما هو الحال في أسباب الإباحة، كذلك ضرورة تدخل المشرع السوداني بحذف النصوص الواردة في القانون الجنائي لسنة (1991) والتي تتعارض صراحة مع قانون الطفل لسنة (2010) حتى لا يحدث صراع بين القضاة أثناء التطبيق. Abstract The Criminal responsibility is a legal obligation to bear the results of the crime, and it is a personal responsibility that does not extend to others and does not arise unless the perpetrator shall be not responsible except upon a mature of free will chose to act . The reasons for exemption from criminal responsibility are related to the Mens rea , and they do not remove the act from describing the crime. In criminal jurisprudence, criminal responsibility divided into causes related to the element of perception, which are young age, insanity, mental disability, forced intoxication, and others related to the element of choice, which are coercion, necessity and misconception of facts. The researcher tried to cover the most important legislative and jurisprudential aspects related to responsibility, and he followed each of the descriptive, analytical, inductive, comparative and historical approaches. The research problem is summarized in the inconsistency between the Child Act of 2010 and the Criminal Act 1991 and the extent of the impact of the state of mental and psychological illness, diabetes and anesthesia on criminal responsibility and in determining the scope of coercion and necessity payment. The researcher reached a number of results, the most important of which is that the Sudanese legislator confused the reasons for exemption from liability with the reasons for permissibility when he used the wording “he is not considered to have committed a crime”. He also concluded that there is a conflict between the Child Law of 2010 and the Criminal Law of 1991 regarding The age of criminal responsibility and measures imposed on the delinquent child. There are a number of recommendations, the most important of which is to reformulate the texts related to the reasons for exemption from criminal responsibility to begin with the phrase “not to be asked criminally” instead of the phrase “A person shall not be considered to have committed an offence” because the wording is consistent with the legal nature of those reasons, as it does not remove the criminalization of the act as it is. The case regarding the reasons for permissibility, as well as the necessity for the Sudanese legislator to intervene by deleting the texts contained in the Criminal Code of 1991 that expressly contradict the Child Law (2010) so that no conflict occurs between judges during the application.Item الخطأ في الحكم الجنائي وآثارة دراسة مقارنة(جامعة النيلين, 2019) محمد آدم أحمد أبكرمستخلص يعد التشريع الجنائي من أهم المجالات التي يبدو فيها القانون الجنائي من خلال التجريم والعقاب يحمي كلاً من حقوق المجني عليه والمصلحة العامة بحكم الضرورة الاجتماعية التي تتطلب هذه الحماية، ويفرض الجزاء الجنائي المناسب الذي يتسم بالمعقولية ولا ينافي الحدود المنطقية التي ينبغي أن تكون إطاراً له، وكل ذلك يتم من خلال معايير ينص عليها الدستور تتمثل في ضمانات يتعين على المشرع العقابي الالتزام بها. وبناءً عليه أن القاضي هو الحارس الطبيعي للحريات وذلك في إطار محاكمة منصفة لذا فلا تجوز مجادلة المحكمة في اقتناعها بالأدلة وباستخلاص الصور الصحيحة لواقعة الدعوى، ولكن حرية المحكمة في الاقتناع لا تعني التحكم ولا تبنى على الفوضى في التقدير فيجب أن يسبب القاضي حكمه مؤسساً اقتناعه على أدلة مقبولة في العقل والمنطق، فالحرية التي يمارسها القاضي تتم في إطار المشروعية، وتحت مظلة القانون ولضمان ذلك تنفيذ الحكم بضوابط معنية لتسبيب أحكامها حتى تكون مرآة هذا المنطق، ومن خلال رقابتها على تسبيب الأحكام فيكون المنطق القضائي سليم ولاحترام القانون. وأخيراً إن الثقة في أحكام القضاء تتطلب عدم توافر أي شك مقبول عند الحكم بالإدانة لأن إدانة إنسان برئ تعد أكثر سوءاً من إطلاق سراح إنسان مذنب. Abstract Criminal legislation considered as the most important branch by wish the criminal law grad and protect through imposing punishment on the wrong door also preserves the rights of individuals and the social common interest as it necessitated by the social wellbeing. Criminal law save grading those rights by imposing proper punishments which equals the standard of the crimes with have been committed and mutant contradict with rules of logic, all that comes through rules and requirements mentioned in the constitution and put certain specification over the legislator and not exceed those limitations. According to what have been mentioned the judge is the Natural Custodian of private liberties and people tights by offering fair trials for everybody on equal terms hence it is not permitted to urge with judgments which reached by the courts and the procedures which have taken by the courts also the evidences reached by the courts in its way to obtain the true picture in the prosecutions this dose mat mean that courts are free to do whatever they like to do, court judge must fell ours reasonable causes for his judgments and teauied to Avoid falling in mistakes by standing in side of the law. The judge should have to bulid his judgment on acceptable persons and evidences. The freedoms which enjoyed by judges fall in the scope of justice and legitimization to guarantee this important aspect the (high Court) supreme court play a big role in monitoring and controlling the right application of the judgments to the law. Finally the trust over judges and their judgments requires that it be are any reasonable doubt intact true strong and real because it is more worst to condemn on innocent person than to release a guilty person from prison.Item حدود السلطة المدنية للمحكمة الجنائية(alneelain, 2010) تاج السر محمد حامدItem الخطوة الاجرامية(2014) خالد عوض السيد السعداويAbstract Criminal Danger Criminal danger is the feeling in the person ,consists of the interaction of several factors ; psychological, social and often leads to the emergence of phenomenon of crime , and this danger plays an important role in the modern penal systems, and that because the purpose of punishment is no longer limited to the punishment of the perpetrator to deter him , but it also extends to another purpose; i.e. To re- fix the criminal and rehabilitate him. The idea of criminal danger originated ,thanks to the researches and studies of the positivist school in Italy , which called for the necessity of determination of the judiciary reaction against crime, according to the seriousness of the crime of the offender , thereby rejecting the idea of the traditional school , as the positivist school denies the principle of freedom of choice for the offender , and tend to confirm the inevitability of criminal phenomenon , namely the principle of fatalism , and it means that the offender is driven by the crime under the influence of several factors , including what is internal due to the organic and psychological configuration of the criminal , other factors are external , due to the environment of this criminal and his conditions. So being the case , there is no talk on his accountability or blame on moral basis, but he is asked socially ,for being a source of danger to the community , which requires the protection of society from him , and that by taking precautionary measures against him , and the such measures are considered the most suitable way for social defense, which is designed to prevent the criminal danger of the criminal, and to put him in a place, were he cannot harm the society , and thus appeared the movement of social defense , an intellectual trend, aiming at defending society against the phenomenon of crime , a requirement that focus on committer of crime and the degree of his severity, and the development of appropriate measures to address this risk , and that from the premise that the purpose of punishment, must always be the protection of society against crime , in order to achieve this purpose , it should be and that the criminal penalty should be headed towards a particular goal i.e.; is to rehabilitate the criminal, on the one hand ,and the protection of society against crime in the future on the other hand , and, accordingly , jurisprudence has called for the need to organize the punishment ,on a way that rehabilitate the offender or is to prevent him from harming society , if criminal was و irreparable The criminal must be the intended to punishment, as long as the purpose of punishment is to rehabilitate him before anything else . The research discussed the position of Islamic law towards the criminal danger , the priorities of Islamic religion is to achieve security for its citizens Muslims and all mankind , so its way is heading in the treatment of crime by taking one of the many ways ; either to address it by provisions contained in the Holy Quran , identifying crime and the crime was named the limits and retribution , or by what Messenger of Allah ordered , and to obey him obey is necessary. As for the Sudanese legislator, it did not explicitly take the idea of criminal danger, because we find that the Criminal Code 1991 , provides, in articles (47 , 48 and 49) on some of the precautionary measures that are applied on the perpetrator of the crime , egg taking precautionary measures anti- freedom for each of whom was blocked for precaution , and the juvenile and the old are to be put in reform and social welfare houses , and those with mental illnesses to be put in one of the institutions for psychiatric treatment care where the he will find care . The Sudanese legislature has a special law on kids by devices in terms of the method of treatment of a criminal, according to his private capacity to the measures which can be imposed on child offenders or at risk of delinquency, the Child Act, 2010. The Libyan law defines the criminal danger in Criminal Law Act No. 48 of 1956 , by stating about the dangerous person in Article ( 135 ) , considering criminal danger as basis for preventive measures .Item بطلان اجراءات التحري في قانون الاجراءات الجنائية السوداني والفلسطيني(2014) بهاء نايف حمد ناجي