1. Right against self incrimination

Right against self-incrimination is recognized as a Fundamental Right under the Indian Constitution. It is based on the maxim "nemo tenetur seipsum accusare" which implies that no man shall be obliged to be a witness against himself. The right is recognized in various International Conventions and Declarations. The right has also been incorporated as a right of accused in different countries. The Apex Court of India has emphasized time and again the significance of the right in its various Judgments. However, with the growth of Science and Technology, the dimensions of Right have undergone a considerable change. It has raised the issues of Testimonial Compulsion and violation of Rights of the accused. The present paper will be an attempt to examine the Impact of growing technology in relation to right against self-incrimination and effort will be made to analyze whether the growth of Science and Technology has in fact resulted or not in violation of the right.

The right to remain silent has always played a central role in measuring the level of protection afforded to suspects in criminal proceedings. Against the increasing spreading of a substantive interpretation of the criminal matter, the need to recognise this fundamental prerogative arises today problematically also in the context of punitive administrative proceedings. This contribution comments on the request for a preliminary ruling in which the Constitutional Court questions the legitimacy to sanction the refusal to cooperate of the person subject to a Consob investigation – possibility provided for also by EU law. After examining the possible decisional scenarios of the Court of Justice and their internal implications, the analysis concludes with a reflection on the sustainability of the “extended” criminal procedural law preached by the Engel doctrine.

Il settore penale in senso classico deve, sempre più, tenere conto dell’espansione di altre aree di diritto “punitivo”, soprattutto nell’ambito dell’accertamento amministrativo. La crescente complessità del sistema repressivo nel contesto comunitario, tuttavia, non può essere risolta solo con un’applicazione estensiva del divieto di bis in idem; si afferma invece in maniera impellente la necessità di riportare tutto il diritto punitivo, specialmente nella fase delle indagini o degli accertamenti amministrativi, all’interno del perimetro disegnato dalle garanzie dell’art. 6 CEDU. In questa prospettiva, ci si soffermerà, con una breve analisi, sui diritti dell’indagato nel panorama europeo, con particolare rilievo alle garanzie previste dai
procedimenti amministrativi OLAF e anti-trust (DG Concorrenza) e dalla direttiva su alcuni aspetti della presunzione di innocenza.

In the wake of widespread revelations about sexual abuse by Harvey Weinstein, Larry Nassar, and others, the United States is reckoning with the past and present and searching for the means to prevent and punish such offenses in the future. The scourge of sexual crimes goes far beyond instances perpetrated by powerful men; this misconduct is rampant throughout the country. In some of these cases, third parties knew about the abuse and did not try to intervene. Scrutiny of—and the response to—such bystanderism is increasing, including in the legal world. In order to align law and society more closely with morality, this Article proposes a more holistic, aggressive approach to prompt involvement by third parties who are aware of specific instances of sexual crimes in the United States. This Article begins by documenting the contemporary scope of sexual crimes in the United States and the crucial role bystanders play in facilitating them. The Article next provides an overview and assess...