The ruling from the Portuguese Supreme Court No. 3/2017 published in Diário da República no. 72/2017, Series I of 2017-04-1 established jurisprudence that “from the close of the criminal investigation with deduction of the indictment , the defendant shall, until the deadline referred to in Article 188/8 of the Criminal Procedure Code, have the right to examine the entire contents of the technical documents relating to the talks or communications heard and to Copies of the parts that he intends to transcribe to join the file, even those that have already been transcribed, provided that the transcription of these parts is justified. ” It is a practice that we hope will now be generalized to all Courts and without bureaucratic and administrative obstacles that sometimes restrict the defendant’s right here recognized to information on concrete and essential aspects of the investigative process against him.
Lawyer offended in crime case must be represented by another lawyer
According to the ACÓRDÃO DO SUPREMO TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA N.º 15/2016 – DIÁRIO DA REPÚBLICA N.º 233/2016, SÉRIE I DE 2016-12-06105322392 the lawyer offended in the criminal process can not represent himself. In this respect, the Supreme Court of Justice ruled that “In accordance with article 70, paragraph 1, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, an offended person who is a lawyer and intends to become an assistant in criminal proceedings must be represented By another lawyer. ‘ It seems to us a bad solution that contradicts the Statute of the Law Bar Association as pointed out by the judge who voted against.
Crédito da Foto: Tim Bogdanov em Unspash
Statute of limitation in embezzlement crime against Social Security
It was published in the Official Gazette the ACÓRDÃO DO SUPREMO TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA N.º 2/2015 – DIÁRIO DA REPÚBLICA N.º 35/2015, SÉRIE I DE 2015-02-19 do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, from the Supreme Court, with the following contents:
“In the embezzlement crime against Social Security, provided for and punishable by Articles 107, number 1, and 105, paragraphs 1 and 5 of the General Regime of Tax Offences (RGIT), the period of limitation of actions criminal starts counting up on the day the deadline legally established for the delivery of appropriate contributory benefits, pursuant to Article 5, paragraph 2, of the same law “.
On this ruling it was at stake the doctrinal and jurisprudential controversy about when the statute of limitation for the criminal procedure of the embezzlement of crime against social security begins, acording to a) of paragraph 4 of Article 105 of the RGIT. On the one hand there is a current that believes that that period should start from the day of the deadline legally established for delivery of the social security institutions in contributions deducted for withholding tax, and on the other a current that understands that such a period of limitation counting only starts after 90 days on the expiry of that deadline for delivery of contributory benefits. This judgment set jurisprudence according to the first current.