{"id":2399,"date":"2024-06-11T19:53:45","date_gmt":"2024-06-11T19:53:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/poderjudicial.gob.do\/?p=40519"},"modified":"2024-06-11T19:53:45","modified_gmt":"2024-06-11T19:53:45","slug":"la-chambre-penale-de-la-cour-supreme-de-justice-se-prononce-sur-le-principe-de-la-double-incrimination","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/2024\/06\/11\/sala-penal-de-la-scj-decide-sobre-principio-de-doble-exposicion\/","title":{"rendered":"La chambre p\u00e9nale de la Cour supr\u00eame de justice se prononce sur le principe de la double incrimination\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>\n
\n

La Chambre p\u00e9nale de la Cour supr\u00eame de justice (SCJ) \u00e9tablit le principe selon lequel il convient d\u2019annuler le jugement lorsqu\u2019une juridiction de renvoi ne se conforme pas \u00e0 l\u2019injonction de r\u00e9examiner le pourvoi en appel avec une composition diff\u00e9rente de celle des juges ayant pr\u00e9c\u00e9demment pris part au jugement rendu sur le premier pourvoi en appel, au motif que cela porte atteinte au respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales. <\/p>\n

Dans son arr\u00eat n\u00b0 SCJ-SS-24-0307,<\/strong> en date du 27 mars de cette ann\u00e9e, les magistrats de ladite chambre ont statu\u00e9 sur une affaire renvoy\u00e9e en appel, qui a \u00e9t\u00e9 examin\u00e9e par deux des magistrats ayant pr\u00e9c\u00e9demment particip\u00e9 \u00e0 la proc\u00e9dure, en violation du principe de double examen pr\u00e9vu \u00e0 l'article 423 du Code de proc\u00e9dure p\u00e9nale, tel que modifi\u00e9 par la loi 10-15.  <\/p>\n

En cons\u00e9quence, les juges de la chambre p\u00e9nale de la Cour supr\u00eame de justice estiment qu\u2019il convient de faire droit au pourvoi en cassation et de renvoyer l\u2019affaire devant la cour d\u2019appel du d\u00e9partement judiciaire de Puerto Plata, afin qu\u2019une formation diff\u00e9rente de celle qui a examin\u00e9 le recours et rendu l\u2019arr\u00eat attaqu\u00e9 r\u00e9examine le recours en appel form\u00e9 par Viatcheslav Karpetsky, ce qui n\u2019a pas \u00e9t\u00e9 le cas.  <\/p>\n

\u00c0 cet \u00e9gard, s'il est vrai que la transmission a \u00e9t\u00e9 effectu\u00e9e avec la fixation d'une audience, celle-ci s'est d\u00e9roul\u00e9e en violation de l'injonction selon laquelle ce pourvoi en appel devait \u00eatre examin\u00e9 par une formation de juges diff\u00e9rente de la pr\u00e9c\u00e9dente, puisque deux des juges qui avaient statu\u00e9 sur l'appel en premi\u00e8re instance ont \u00e9galement statu\u00e9 sur la transmission. <\/p>\n

L'arr\u00eat explique que ce qui pr\u00e9c\u00e8de porte atteinte au respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales, en ce qui concerne le principe fondamental de toute proc\u00e9dure, \u00e0 savoir l\u2019impartialit\u00e9 du juge, et, par cons\u00e9quent, enfreint les dispositions de l\u2019article 423 du Code de proc\u00e9dure p\u00e9nale, modifi\u00e9 par la loi n\u00b0 10-15, en ce qui concerne la constitution de cette juridiction dans les cas qui y sont pr\u00e9vus. <\/p>\n

Pour consulter l'arr\u00eat rendu par les juges Francisco Antonio Jerez Mena, pr\u00e9sident, et les membres Nancy I. Salcedo Fern\u00e1ndez, Fran Euclides Soto S\u00e1nchez, Mar\u00eda G. Garabito Ram\u00edrez et Francisco Antonio Ortega Polanco, ici.<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Source<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

La Chambre p\u00e9nale de la Cour supr\u00eame de justice (SCJ) \u00e9tablit le crit\u00e8re selon lequel il convient d\u2019annuler le jugement lorsqu\u2019une juridiction de renvoi ne se conforme pas \u00e0 l\u2019injonction de r\u00e9examiner le pourvoi en appel avec une composition diff\u00e9rente de celle\u2026<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[11,9,10,12],"class_list":["post-2399","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-actualidad","tag-consultores-legales","tag-firma-de-abogados-johann-newton-lopez","tag-noticias","tag-suprema-corte-de-justicia"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2399","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2399"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2399\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2399"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2399"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jnlopez.com\/francais\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2399"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}