IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/smo/lpaper/0112.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Use of Experts in Criminal Proceedings in Romania. Inquisitorial Background and Future Trends

Author

Listed:
  • Adrian Sandru

    (Institute of Juridical Studies Acad. Andrei Rădulescu of Romanian Academy, Romania)

Abstract

This paper aims to study and expose by comparing the institution of scientific evidence and the use of the expert in criminal proceedings, starting from the structural differences in evidence legal framework between the adversarial system and the continental system, to comparing procedural details on the disposition, conduct or assessment of an expert report. A comparative analysis of different legal systems, pointing out their advantages and disadvantages, should not lead necessary to a legal transplant, but could generate new visions that can materialize in certain proposals to improve criminal proceedings legislation through innovative legislative solutions that are inspired both from adversarial and continental systems and taking into consideration all the rules of criminal procedure at Romanian internal level.

Suggested Citation

  • Adrian Sandru, 2021. "The Use of Experts in Criminal Proceedings in Romania. Inquisitorial Background and Future Trends," RAIS Conference Proceedings 2021 0112, Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:smo:lpaper:0112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://rais.education/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/0112.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. World Bank, 2010. "Comparative Study on Expert Witnesses in Court Proceedings," World Bank Publications - Reports 2991, The World Bank Group.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Keywords

      expert evidence; criminal proceedings; evidence law; scientific evidence;
      All these keywords.

      NEP fields

      This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:smo:lpaper:0112. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Eduard David (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://rais.education/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.