Post by firoj1212 on Feb 11, 2024 3:53:47 GMT -5
progression for those convicted of heinous crimes unconstitutional. For the ministers, the prohibition violates the principle of individualization of sentences. The ballot boxes The Federal Supreme Court was not left out of the 2006 elections. In fact, its participation was remarkable and decisive. It removed the barrier clause, guaranteeing the existence of dwarf parties and stopped the party alliances, at least this year. For the ministers, the end of vertical integration, approved in a Constitutional Amendment this year, will only be valid from 2007 onwards, as the principle of electoral precedence must be respected. The court ended the year with a big pickle on its hands: the Mensalão inquiry.
The court's mission is to try to judge, in a timely manner, the case against 40 people, including parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians. The STF even tried to dismember the investigation, but backed down. All those reported will be judged by the STF. Conflicts and solutions If there is no offense to Argentina Email List indigenous rights, a crime against or committed by an Indian must be judged by the State Court. Public servant's case against public administration goes to the common courts, not to the Labor Court. In the Labor Court, unions can represent union members whatever the case. But cases of slave labor will probably have to be resolved in Federal Court. These were some of the conflicts of jurisdiction that the Supreme Court defined. In 2006, the legal profession had victories and defeats in the Supreme Court.
The court overturned some provisions of the Advocacy Statute, such as the one that allowed the lawyer to speak after the rapporteur of the case. In the list of victories, the participation of lawyers in all constitutive acts of legal entities registered with a registry office and the prerogative of imprisonment in the General Staff room was guaranteed. If this does not exist, the lawyer may be placed under house arrest. In favor of the broad right of defense, Minister Celso de Mello defended the principle of commonality of evidence. Even though the investigation is under judicial secrecy, said the minister, this secrecy does not affect the lawyers of the person being investigated, who can have access to all documents in the case, including the evidence produced by the prosecution.
The court's mission is to try to judge, in a timely manner, the case against 40 people, including parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians. The STF even tried to dismember the investigation, but backed down. All those reported will be judged by the STF. Conflicts and solutions If there is no offense to Argentina Email List indigenous rights, a crime against or committed by an Indian must be judged by the State Court. Public servant's case against public administration goes to the common courts, not to the Labor Court. In the Labor Court, unions can represent union members whatever the case. But cases of slave labor will probably have to be resolved in Federal Court. These were some of the conflicts of jurisdiction that the Supreme Court defined. In 2006, the legal profession had victories and defeats in the Supreme Court.
The court overturned some provisions of the Advocacy Statute, such as the one that allowed the lawyer to speak after the rapporteur of the case. In the list of victories, the participation of lawyers in all constitutive acts of legal entities registered with a registry office and the prerogative of imprisonment in the General Staff room was guaranteed. If this does not exist, the lawyer may be placed under house arrest. In favor of the broad right of defense, Minister Celso de Mello defended the principle of commonality of evidence. Even though the investigation is under judicial secrecy, said the minister, this secrecy does not affect the lawyers of the person being investigated, who can have access to all documents in the case, including the evidence produced by the prosecution.