Alternative flash content
You need to upgrade your Flash Player
Doha Events 2011
Quick Links
international newspapers
World's largest listing of newspapers on the web 
Conditions for custody on remand Thursday, 24 June 2010 02:15
by Noora Sarhan
Though custody on remand is justified as a precaution, it should not override individual freedom as a basic right for every human being.
Detention in origin is a penalty that denies the defendant his freedom for a while, and it must take place according to a sentence following a fair trial based on guarantees for the defendant to defend himself. This meets criminal trial norms and basic humans’ rights implying that that the human being is innocent in origin. So custody on remand, though legally ratified as an investigation procedure, contradicts the supposed innocence of the human being.
Custody on remand is justified as a precaution to facilitate fair investigation procedures by preventing the defendant from undermining investigation procedures by terrifying witnesses or interfering in the work of experts or reports.
It also protects the defendant from being attacked by his rivals, and gives some satisfaction to the victim and the people affected by the culprit’s action.
Custody on remand may prevent the accused from defending himself properly, especially in monetary cases, either by submitting necessary documents in case he is free or suffering moral and material damages. The investigator should not refuse detention on remand provided it is necessary as it is an exception to the supposed innocence in every human being stipulated in the Constitution. He should, before ordering the custody on remand, ascertain that it is well justified. Once the preliminary investigation finishes the custody on remand becomes pointless.
Most international legislations including Qatari law reflects aversion to custody on remand by
finding alternatives.
Article No. (110) of the Criminal Procedure Code No. (23) of 2004 stipulates that the General Prosecution may refer the defendant to custody on remand if it is approved, after investigating him or if he escapes, there is enough evidence to accuse him and if the crime he committed is punishable by more than six months.
The General Prosecution can issue the following procedures instead of custody on remand in case the previous cases and other punishable by imprisonment misdemeanuors:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Ban the defendant from practising certain activities.
In all cases, the defendant can be given custody on remand in case he has no fixed and known residence in Qatar and he commits a crime punishable by imprisonment.
In fact, restricting people’s freedom by detention is very dangerous and it should be based on worthy evidence and not only on suspicions to be submitted by the investigator to the court to condemn and sentence the defendant. The investigator should not put the defendant in custody on remand in case there is no clear evidence.
Custody on remand is exclusively approved by the investigator and not the court and should be based on clear evidence. If not, the defendant should be free when referred to court for the fact that detention in origin is a penalty to be sentenced by court according to uncertain evidence.
Ban the attendance of the defendant in fixed places. Order the defendant to compulsorily appear before police at fixed times. Put the defendant under police surveillance. Order the accused not to leave his residence or country.
Comments
if for example that the accuse defend himselp that he never do that accussation of the plaintiff and even no witness ,what the judgement of the court and they detained that person for he never knows what is happening because that case presented last two years ago and at the beginning the authorities let the accuse free even the case is not yet heared.
Quote
as for my question. that the person now in jell because of he accused of the plaintiff that he go inside the house but the fact that the accused he swear that he never been that place and he dont know that women because only in the telephone if ever that they saw that person must be theres witnessed but for about two years ago just now they catched and present to the court and the didint say any words just give a stamp document and the date of the trial without the knowledge of the accused if what happen.why at first they let them free and all personal information they his name his worked if theres any hearing they have have knowledge if where the person are because they investigate already my question is why they put him in jell and he didint defend himself of what the accusation was. i need an answer because im just a poor ,working here so that we can provide food for our family .thank you for being human generous..
RSS feed for comments to this post.