Search

The goal of the author is to investigate a slightly obscure topic: the practice of interwar military justice in Hungary and its related questions, with an emphasis on matters concerning the peculiarities on how to implement them. The bill - which came into effect in 1930 - was born amidst uncommon historical conditions, since the Trianon Peace Treaty basically degraded Hungary into a quasi-numb entity. It is without a doubt that the decade-long consolidation - and its achievements - that came after can be regarded as one of the most prominently successful periods of the era's political history. The historical pressure, the necessity of being able to defend ourselves along with the importance of national security demanded that our army remained intact, despite the prohibitions that surrounded its existence. This called for ensuring that the legal environment was modernized enough to be capable of supporting this goal. The system of regulations inherited from the Austro-Hungarian monarchy was subjected to scrutiny and as a result ended up as a state-of-the art framework that even surpassed the European standards it aimed to match. This paper, putting emphasis on the most important dogmatic junctions, will further review these regulations - substantive or procedural contents alike -. After a brief diversion towards taking a glimpse into the historical situation, we will introduce the system of sanctions and punishments pertaining to military personnel, and proceed with the regulations related to their implementation, which in turn will offer a glimpse into the contemporary philosophy that surrounded military justice and procedure. In accordance, further regulations containing provisions regarding infrastructure, personnel, accommodation, and institution security in general would emerge. The author of the article provides a summary of the most important current relevant legal provisions. It touches upon the military justice system and its subsystems, introduces the more substantive procedural rules, and concludes with an argument on practical implementation. It will also raise the theoretical question on a future independent regulation which would take place in accordance with the reforms of the Hungarian military and the national strategy on defense. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A szerző áttekintést nyújt a büntetés-végrehajtási jog elméleti és etikai alapjairól.

The Hungarian Csemegi Code, which was the first act - in a modern sense - that - obviously besides being a substantive law - had provisions that addressed questions related to the execution of its contents, was a milestone in the development of Hungarian criminal law. The vivid development (emanating from the urging will to reduce the gap between Hungary and the more developed countries, the progressively strengthening economy and the escalation of relevant correctional academic literature) apparent during the three decades that followed 1880 also resulted in a more lucrative period for the field of corrections as well. While towards the end of the 19th century, the classical school of correctional science mostly revolved around the questions of security, discipline, infrastructure and technical issues while being less focused on actual legal questions, the effects of the positivist school - by the 20th century - have seeped into its framework, resulting in the introduction of the so-called personality-influenced individualization, aimed at reducing the chances of recidivism and thus avoiding committing repeated offences. This process is symbolized by the several amendments made to the original Csemegi Code. Present study will address this historical and legal development arc in a more detailed manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is almost a quarter of a century since the correctional legislation of 1993 came into effect. The importance of this regulation cannot be stressed enough since its focus was to facilitate Hungary's entry to the more up-to-date European norms. By analysing the social and legal circumstances of the era, the author presents the more important events of the codification, its provisions and long-term effects. The author concludes by stating that modern correctional philosophy has only had a brief impact on the legal evolution of the relevant fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the Prison Code1 came into effect on 1 January 2015, it is now possible to evaluate its accomplishments. Some might say that this brief time span is simply insufficient for obtaining the practical experience required to make universal claims or point out trends. As one year in the life of an act is indeed a short period, this statement is by no means beyond reason. Nevertheless, the novelty and the importance of the changes introduced by the Prison Code still allow for a brief summary. The author provides an overview of the theoretician ethical foundations of prison law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]