You are here:

Airteagal 50 - An ceart chun nach ndéanfar duine a thriail ná a phionósú faoi dhó in imeachtaí coiriúla i ngeall ar an gcion coiriúil céanna

Airteagal 50 - An ceart chun nach ndéanfar duine a thriail ná a phionósú faoi dhó in imeachtaí coiriúla i ngeall ar an gcion coiriúil céanna

Ní dhlífear aon duine a thriail ná a phionósú athuair in imeachtaí coiriúla i ngeall ar chion ar éigiontaíodh nó ar ciontaíodh é nó í go críochnaitheach san Aontas i ngeall air cheana i gcomhréir leis an dlí.

    Text:

    Mar seo a leanas atá in Airteagal 4 de Phrótacal Uimh. 7 a ghabhann leis an CECD:

    `1. Ní féidir aon duine a thriail ná a phionósú athuair in imeachtaí coiriúla faoin dlínse sa Stát céanna i ngeall ar chion a bhfuil sé éigiontaithe nó ciontaithe go críochnaitheach i ngeall air cheana i gcomhréir leis an dlí agus an nós imeachta coiriúil sa Stát sin.

    2. Ní choiscfidh na forálacha sa mhír roimhe seo ar an gcás a athoscailt i gcomhréir leis an dlí agus an nós imeachta coiriúil sa Stát i dtrácht, má tá fianaise nua nó fíorais atá fionnta go nua nó má tá éalang bunúsach sna himeachtaí roimhe sin a d'fhéadfadh fearadh ar an mbreithiúnas a tugadh.

    3. Níl aon mhaolú ceadaithe ar an Airteagal seo faoi Airteagal 15 sa Choinbhinsiún.`

    Tá feidhm ag riail an `non bis in idem` maidir le dlí an Aontais (féach, i measc na raidhse fasach, breithiúnas an 5 Bealtaine 1996, Cásanna Ceangailte 18/65 agus 35/65, Gutmann v. Coimisiún [1966] ECR 149 agus cás a bhí ann le déanaí, breith ón gCúirt Chéadchéime an 20 Aibreán 1999, Cásanna Ceangailte T305/94 agus eile, Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij NV v. Coimisiún [1999] ECR II-931). Carnadh dhá phionós den chineál céanna atá i gceist sa riail a thoirmisceann an carnadh, eadhon pionóis dlí choiriúil.

    I gcomhréir le hAirteagal 50, ní hé amháin go bhfuil feidhm ag riail an `non bis in idem` laistigh de dhlínse aon Stáit amháin ach tá feidhm aici freisin idir dhlínsí roinnt Ballstát. Freagraíonn sé seo don acquis i ndlí an Aontais; féach Airteagail 54 go 58 de Choinbhinsiún Schengen agus breithiúnas na Cúirte Breithiúnais an 11 Feabhra 2003, C–187/01 Gözütok (2003, ECR I-1345), Airteagal 7 den Choinbhinsiún maidir le Leasa Airgeadais na gComhphobal Eorpach a chosaint agus Airteagal 10 den Choinbhinsiún maidir leis an éillitheacht a chomhrac. Na heisceachtaí fíortheoranta atá sna Coinbhinsiúin sin a cheadaíonn do na Ballstáit riail an `non bis in idem` a mhaolú, clúdaítear sa chlásal cothrománach in Airteagal 52(1) den Chairt maidir le teorainneacha iad. Maidir leis na cásanna dá dtagraítear in Airteagal 4 de Phrótacal Uimh. 7, eadhon ina ndéantar an prionsabal a chur i bhfeidhm laistigh den Bhallstát céanna, is ionann brí agus raon feidhme don cheart ráthaithe agus don cheart comhfhreagrach sa CECD.

    TEIDEAL VII – FORÁLACHA GINEARÁLTA A bhFUIL LÉIRIÚ AGUS CUR I bhFEIDHM NA CAIRTE FAOINA RIALÚ

    Source:
    Iris Oifigiúil an Aontais Eorpaigh C 303/17 - 14.12.2007

    Preamble - Explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights:
    Ullmhaíodh na mínithe seo i dtosach faoi údarás Praesidium an Choinbhinsiúin a dhréachtaigh an Chairt um Chearta Bunúsacha an Aontais Eorpaigh. Tugadh suas chun dáta iad faoi chúram Praesidium an Choinbhinsiúin Eorpaigh i bhfianaise na gcoigeartuithe dréachtaithe a rinne an Coinbhinsiún sin ar théacs na Cairte (go háirithe ar Airteagail 51 agus 52) agus i bhfianaise an fhoráis a tháinig ar dhlí an Aontais. Cé nach bhfuil stádas dlí acu iontu féin, is mór is fiú iad mar uirlis léirithe arb é is aidhm di forálacha na Cairte a shoiléiriú.

21 results found

0 results found

3 results found

  • Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law
    URL:
    (Directive on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law)

    Preamble: (21) Given the possibility of multiple jurisdictions for cross-border criminal offences falling under the scope of this Directive, the Member States should ensure that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected in full in the application of national law transposing this Directive ... (28) The intended dissuasive effect of the application of criminal law sanctions requires particular caution with regard to fundamental rights. This Directive respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and in particular the right to liberty and security, the protection of personal data, the freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work, the freedom to conduct a business, the right to property, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence and the right of defence, the principles of the legality and proportionality of criminal offences and sanctions, as well as the principle of ne bis in idem. This Directive seeks to ensure full respect for those rights and principles and must be implemented accordingly.

  • Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters
    URL:
    Directive on regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters

    Preamble: (17) The principle of ne bis in idem is a fundamental principle of law in the Union, as recognised by the Charter and developed by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Therefore the executing authority should be entitled to refuse the execution of an EIO if its execution would be contrary to that principle. Given the preliminary nature of the proceedings underlying an EIO, its execution should not be subject to refusal where it is aimed to establish whether a possible conflict with the ne bis in idem principle exists, or where the issuing authority has provided assurances that the evidence transferred as a result of the execution of the EIO would not be used to prosecute or impose a sanction on a person whose case has been finally disposed of in another Member State for the same facts. ... Article 11. Grounds for non-recognition or non-execution: 1. Without prejudice to Article 1(4), recognition or execution of an EIO may be refused in the executing State where: ... (d) the execution of the EIO would be contrary to the principle of ne bis in idem

  • Directive 2014/57/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on criminal sanctions for market abuse (market abuse directive)
    URL:
    Directive on criminal sanctions for market abuse (market abuse directive)

    Preamble: (23) The scope of this Directive is determined in such a way as to complement, and ensure the effective implementation of, Regulation (EU) No 596/2014. Whereas offences should be punishable under this Directive when committed intentionally and at least in serious cases, sanctions for breaches of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 do not require that intent is proven or that they are qualified as serious. In the application of national law transposing this Directive, Member States should ensure that the imposition of criminal sanctions for offences in accordance with this Directive and of administrative sanctions in accordance with the Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 does not lead to a breach of the principle of ne bis in idem.