Section 11(5) of the Child Act 2001 (CA 2001) provides that the jurisdiction of the Court For Children (CFC) is to try all types of offenses committed by children except for offenses punishable by the death penalty. Therefore, when a child commits an offense for which the punishment is the death penalty, the child should be tried in the High Court. This research was carried out to determine the legal definitions of children, accused, and child offenders. Following that, this research examines the rights of child offenders according to international human rights law and Malaysian law. The author will also examine the pertinent cases. The author collects data using the library research approach. This research focuses on several rights of child offenders, namely the right to bail, the right to be detained separately from adults, the right to a closed trial, and the right to a fair sentence. Trial at the High Court is conducted by a judge, whereas in the CFC a judge will be aided by two advisers, one of the advisers shall be a woman. These differences may result in injustice to child offenders during trial in the High Court. Therefore, amendments to the CA 2001 should be made to preserve the rights of child offenders of offenses punishable by death.

This study examines the Tangerang Religious Court's ruling in case number 1189/Pdt.G/2023/PA.Tnk, focusing on child custody disputes arising from apostasy within marital dissolution. The research investigates how Islamic civil law operates within Indonesia's judicial framework, particularly when religious conversion becomes a determining factor in custody arrangements. Employing a normative juridical approach alongside descriptive analytical methods, the investigation draws primary data from court rulings, trial documentation, and judicial reasoning articulated by the panel of judges. Secondary sources encompass statutory regulations, Islamic jurisprudence literature, scholarly journals, and pertinent reference materials. The theoretical foundation rests on Classical Islamic Law principles articulated by Imam Syafi'i, which address the legal implications of apostasy on marital bonds and parental rights, complemented by legal interpretation frameworks developed by Dr. Yahya Harahap, SH., MH., regarding procedural justice in religious courts. The research reveals tensions between protecting children's religious upbringing and applying established custody principles that typically favor maternal care for young children. Findings demonstrate how judges navigate between statutory law, Islamic jurisprudence, and the best interests of the child when apostasy disrupts conventional custody determinations.

The criminalisation of non-consensual sexual intercourse through Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and now Sections 63–65 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), is a cornerstone of gender-justice jurisprudence in India. At the same time, courts increasingly confront a complex category of cases where sexual relationships arise out of love affairs, live-in arrangements, or promises of marriage, and later collapse into allegations of rape. This paper examines the “thin line” between genuine prosecution and alleged misuse of rape law in relationship disputes, with particular reference to IPC Section 376 and BNS Sections 64–65. Doctrinally, the paper analyses key Supreme Court and High Court decisions distinguishing between (a) sexual intercourse induced by a fraudulent promise to marry and (b) consensual intimacy that later deteriorates. Cases such as Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana and Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra have laid down tests on consent and “misconception of fact”, while recent decisions under BNS 64 reiterate that breach of promise per se is not rape unless fraudulent intent exists from the inception of the relationship. Empirically, the paper uses an illustrative mixed-methods framework based on: (i) structured interviews with stakeholders (advocates, police officers, trial court staff, and litigants) and (ii) content analysis of 50 reported judgments and 30 media reports on relationship-based rape FIRs between 2018 and 2025. Descriptive statistics suggest that a significant proportion of such cases involve long-term consensual relationships where families or social pressures play a catalysing role in criminalisation. A working hypothesis – that courts are increasingly sceptical of criminalising failed relationships as rape in the absence of clear evidence of initial deception – finds support in recent acquittals and quashing orders. Science and Technology of India The paper argues that while narratives of “misuse” should not be weaponised to delegitimise genuine survivors, it is equally dangerous to convert every broken relationship into a criminal case under BNS 64. It recommends clearer statutory explanation of “misconception of fact” in the context of intimate relationships, better police training, gender-sensitised counselling at the pre-FIR stage, and safeguards against both under-enforcement and over-criminalisation. The study concludes that a balanced jurisprudence must preserve rape law’s protective function while preventing its deployment as a tool of retaliation, negotiation, or moral policing of adult intimacy.

This study aims to present the effects of ruling the unconstitutionality of legislative omission and the consequences that result from it. The methods of implementing this type of constitutional ruling by reviewing the role of the executive and judicial authorities in implementing the ruling of unconstitutionality of legislative omission and the role of the Supreme Constitutional Court in setting controls in its ruling that are considered Complementary to the text ruled unconstitutional due to legislative oversight. The study also aims to clarify the extent of the validity of the ruling unconstitutional of the legal text affected by the omission, the role of the legislative authority in activating the legal texts ruled unconstitutional due to legislative oversight, especially if the Supreme Constitutional Court does not establish controls, conditions, or standards that complement This text, and therefore the failure of the legislative authority to intervene will lead to disruption of the implementation of the text. The study relied on two approaches to answer the main question of this study as well as its sub-questions: the comparative approach to compare Egypt, Italy, and Belgium in how to deal with the effects of the ruling of unconstitutionality due to legislative negligence and the content analysis approach to analyze the practices of the Supreme Constitutional Court in setting standards, controls, or conditions that It adds to the article that was ruled unconstitutional, as well as the practices of the trial court if the constitutional judge specified these conditions, or if he did not set it.

Abstract Court-curbing legislation seeks to constrain judicial independence and create a judicial environment that aligns with the preferences of the state legislature. Much of the existing court-curbing literature focuses on court curbing at the national level and state courts of last resort. However, most cases in the United States are decided by lower state courts. This article examines the motivations to curb lower state courts. Our results suggest that as legislative professionalization increases, the legislatures are more likely to introduce legislation that curbs state trial courts. Unlike existing literature on federal courts and state courts of last resort, the ideological distance from the bill sponsor and the state lower courts does not influence court-curbing activity. Our results hold when tested at both the bill and state levels.

A widely covered Sixth Circuit decision on July 29, 2025, against a tenured African American female law professor at the University of Michigan has dramatically materialized in the face of the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of the United States only weeks earlier in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, decided on June 5, 2025. The Court had just eliminated another basis for employment-discrimination case dismissals, centering its original-textualist interpretative mode under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and buttressing plaintiffs’ Seventh Amendment rights to trial by jury. Meanwhile, the Michigan panel in Beny v. University of Michigan was applying its “Honest Belief” doctrine, affirming a trial court’s dismissal of a high-profile lawsuit by reaching the factual conclusions that the employer’s mistaken conclusions harmful to the employee were excusable non-discrimination because of the presence of “honest belief.” The 3-0 panel effected a shutout in an intriguing case featuring eyebrow-raising factual disputes within a storied law school significant in historic American DEI jurisprudence. The bombshell conflict presents an urgent setup for another U.S. Supreme Court tempering of judicial overreach, this time over the pattern of the lower courts’ substituting their conclusions of fact and credibility for those of juries. The current clash surfaces through a doctrine rejected by some circuits and implemented in others: Honest Belief. In this piece, the author illustrates that, by permitting any mistaken but “honest” rationale as legally sufficient to deny a Title VII claimant a trial by jury, the Honest Belief doctrine collapses the classical pretext analysis into a self-validating circle. In effect, purported honesty becomes its own proof, rendering discrimination law incoherent by insulating defendants from meaningful fact-finding as to motive. It is this logical circularity – an epistemic loop, as far as employment law is concerned – that calls for full exposition in order to move the discourse beyond partial critiques and toward a principled rejection of the doctrine altogether. Although several prominent scholars have noticed and taken aim at the Honest Belief doctrine in recent years, their treatments have remained circumscribed. These works are appropriately critical, recognizing the doctrine’s lack of textual basis and its function as a judicial invention that offends Rule 56 protocols. Yet these contributions remain deferential to the idea that an employer’s Honest Belief might ever be a legitimate defense. This article goes further, exposing the doctrine’s inherent tautology and establishing that circularity as a fallacy irreconcilable with unanimous U.S. Supreme Court precedents dating back to 2003 overturning dismissals similar to the one in Beny. Courts’ application of the Honest Belief Doctrine is contravening unanimous U.S. Supreme Court precedents, vitiating Seventh Amendment rights, and fostering juridical emotionalism. The result is the recurring imposition of clearly erroneous dismissals of Title VII cases that abrogate Plaintiffs’ Seventh Amendment rights to trial by jury. The author concludes that the freshly prominent Honest Belief doctrine is a jurisprudential trap that the U.S. Supreme Court should eliminate immediately.

Decision number 3/Pid.Pra/2018/PN Pso is a pretrial decision that has permanent legal force because no appeal or cassation can be made, with the following verdict in essence: Declaring the Instruction Letter (P-19) invalid and not binding; declaring the action that stops the prosecution is invalid; ordering the case files to be immediately transferred to the Poso District Court for trial. This thesis aims to study and analyze the authority of the Pretrial Judge in examining and deciding cases regarding the invalidity of the termination of the investigation and the invalidity of the termination of the prosecution based on the Notification Letter of Progress of the Investigation Results; the authority of the Pretrial Judge in ordering the Prosecutor’s Office to immediately transfer the case to trial; legal efforts that can be taken by the Prosecutor’s Office against the verdict ordering the Prosecutor’s Office to immediately transfer the case to trial. It uses a normative juridical method, theory of authority, theory of law enforcement, and theory of criminal justice system. The results of the study show that the Pretrial Judge has exceeded his authority and there has been a judicial error or a clear error in trying the object of the pretrial because the basis for submitting the pretrial application is the Notification Letter of Progress of Investigation Results and there has been no Letter of Termination either at the Investigation or Prosecution level. The Pretrial Judge has exceeded his authority and there has been a judicial error or a clear error in examining and deciding the case to immediately transfer the case files or continue the prosecution of the case to the trial because the one who can determine whether or not a prosecution of a case can be carried out is the Public Prosecutor as dominus litis.

The crime of pornography is an act that violates moral norms by producing, distributing, or possessing pornographic content, which is regulated in Law Number 44 of 2008 concerning Pornography. Violations of this law can be subject to criminal sanctions in the form of imprisonment and fines. The crime of pornography is a phenomenon that arises in society that can be committed by anyone and against anyone who becomes a victim. Amidst advances in technology and science, the crime of pornography can also occur with the support of internet technology through social media accounts. Social media users are also expected to be wise in using available applications so as not to cause negative impacts and losses to others, especially in loading, distributing, transferring content containing pornographic elements. Of course, for anyone who commits pornographic acts must be responsible for their actions in accordance with applicable legal provisions, of course through the criminal justice system from the investigation process at the Police to the trial in Court until a judge's decision is made to determine whether someone is found guilty or not. The method used in this study is a normative juridical research type, while the approach used in this study is a case study approach. The data collected in this study was sourced from literature. The conclusion of this study is that the verdict handed down by the judge against the perpetrator of the pornography crime in this case study lacks a sense of justice and legal certainty. The judge failed to consider other elements in his considerations, thus making the application of the article inappropriate.

Abstract China has aimed to develop one of the most extensive courtroom broadcasting systems in the world. Initially introduced as part of judicial reforms to enhance transparency, the system sought to normalise the live broadcasting of court trials, allowing the public to observe judicial proceedings in real time. This article evaluates how the system has operated in practice. Drawing on policy documents and empirical evidence, it argues that the broadcasting initiative became increasingly resisted by judges and courts and shaped by a court-centric logic due to administrative pressures and concerns over risks. Since around 2020, courtroom live broadcasts have gradually been suspended. Courts have scaled back their use and adopted a more managed and selective approach. This article analyses the reasons for this shift and concludes that meaningful reform is now required to ensure the system can continue to serve its stated objectives in a sustainable and principled manner.

Abstract This study investigates the stance functions of but as a contrastive marker in Nigerian Supreme Court judgements to explore other lexical means of marking stances in the legal genre aside value-laden words and lexico-grammatical constructions. The study analysed a corpus of Nigerian Supreme Court judgements comprising lead, supporting and dissenting judgements for stance classification, following the stance triangle model. Findings show that the contrastive marker mostly signals epistemic, evidential, and evaluative stances, an indication that even with but the presentation of subjective positions in judicial opinions entails evaluation of other stance takers’ stances, assertive presentation of such positions alongside cogent evidence to justify and legitimise them. Alignment and affective positions are rarely signalled with but in the corpus, which implies that beyond any other communicative intents, projection of individual voice based on legal principles and facts is more important to the judge than expression of affect or alignment with others.

ABSTRACT Drawing on a preliminary study guided by the principles of the Job Demands-Resources Model, the aim of this study was to investigate the experiences of secondary traumatisation (ST) of social workers supporting traumatised children and their families. In partnership with the Lazio Regional Chapter of the National Council of Social Workers in Italy (CROAS Lazio), the research team analysed a small sample of in-depth interviews with social workers engaged in community-based and justice-related services for children and families. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and submitted to theoretically-oriented thematic analysis. The narratives analysed appeared to blur the lines between ST and burnout, a more widely recognised professional risk among Italian social workers. However, traumatic symptoms of ST are particularly pervasive when working with sexually abused children in specific situations, such as family separations or trials. Our findings show that participants identified personal, work-related, organisational, and interorganisational factors that function either as job demands or resources, influencing the reinforcement or mitigation of ST risk. The findings offer insights into developing targeted strategies to prevent ST, thereby fostering sustainable and supportive work environments. IMPLICATIONS Systemic interventions are crucial to addressing secondary traumatisation among social workers, including specialised training throughout their careers, particularly in high-risk contexts like court trials and removals of children from the home due to abuse and neglect. Policy reforms should focus on reducing caseloads, enhancing professional supervision, and fostering team collaboration. Improved interprofessional and interorganisational co-operation can further alleviate the isolating nature of the profession, promoting social workers' wellbeing and improving care quality for vulnerable children and families.

Traumatic reactivation during court trial among a pediatric patient cohort: the example of the July 14, 2016 Nice terrorist attack.

Litigation Involving Intravitreal Injections in Ophthalmology: A Review of Legal Claims and Outcomes.

This article examines discussions on deepfake evidence in the United States and derives implications for Korean legal system. In the U.S., the discussions on deepfake evidence have largely converged on the issue of authenticity. Under the current Federal Rules of Evidence, a trial court determines whether the proponent of the evidence has presented sufficient evidence to satisfy a reasonable jury that the evidence is what the proponent claims it is. If such prima facie proof is established, the court admits the evidence, leaving the jury to make the final determination of its authenticity. There is no consensus on whether the current Federal Rules of Evidence reveal limitations in addressing the emergence and proliferation of deepfake evidence, nor on how, if so, the current rules should be amended. The followings are potential amendments to the current Federal Rules of Evidence to address deepfake evidence: i) strengthening the standard for establishing the authenticity of images, videos, and recordings submitted as evidence beyond current requirements in order to counter the potential destructive power of deepfakes; ii) strengthening the court's gatekeeping function by having the court make the final determination on the authenticity of evidence, iii) structuring the evidentiary hearing procedure such that if a party challenging the authenticity of evidence first proves that the likelihood of the evidence being fabricated or altered is greater than the likelihood that it is not, the party submitting the evidence must then prove that the evidentiary value of the evidence outweighs the prejudicial effect. It is foreseeable that cases involving the submission of deepfake evidence or the raising of deepfake defenses would occur and increase in Korea as well. Nevertheless, Korean Criminal Procedure Act does no explicitly require the authenticity of evidence in general. The task of codifying authenticity as a requirement for admissibility is now an urgent matter that can no longer be postponed. Moreover, just as deepfake evidence is admitted as genuine evidence, the mere possibility of deepfake existence poses a significant threat to the discovery of substantive truth if genuine evidence is deemed to have been manipulated or altered. Particularly in citizen participation trials, the ‘deepfake defense’—which seeks to exploit jurors' skepticism toward genuine evidence due to the possibility of deepfakes—must be appropriately controlled.

The paper analyzes the notions “court protection effectiveness” and “access to justice” in civil cases, as well as the balance between them. The study established that court protection accessibility is the key for effective justice; however, the accessibility does not guarantee effectiveness. Moreover, there were revealed objective and subjective circumstances influencing achieving civil litigation goals in the context of justice effectiveness. Subjective factors encumbering receipt of the court protection of violated rights are circumstances depending on the plaintiff. In some instances, a goal of judicial recourse cannot be achieved because of plaintiff’s bona fide ignorance. Objective preclusions do not depend on the plaintiff though sometimes are created by courts. The authors studied indicators, conditions, assessment criteria, guarantees of court protection effectiveness, alongside with characteristics of the latter. There was made a conclusion that the most significant characteristics of court protection are the following: timely case consideration; rationality of procedural activities by the court and interested persons; procedural economy; validity, relevancy, equitableness of a trial court decision; its stability and consistency with higher courts position within the principle of legal certainty; court decision enforceability. There have been worked out ways to improve legislation that are aimed at optimizing implementation of the right to judicial recourse and receiving effective court protection. Some of the most significant ways are stimulation of mediation through offering relief for the payment of state duty, implementing criteria for admissibility of complaints, as well as criteria for admissibility of limitation of the right to judicial recourse.

This study discusses the effectiveness of the implementation of Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 of 2019, as amended by Supreme Court Regulation Number 7 of 2022, concerning Case Administration and Trials in Courts Electronically (e-Litigation). The research focuses on case settlement at the Malang City Religious Court. Using an empirical juridical approach, this study examines the implementation of e-Litigation before and after the regulatory changes, along with the obstacles encountered and efforts made for improvement. The findings indicate that the implementation of e-Litigation has had a positive impact by simplifying processes, improving time efficiency, reducing litigation costs, and enhancing transparency. However, challenges such as limited public understanding of digital systems, inadequate infrastructure, and legal cultural barriers still hinder full effectiveness. Based on the theory of legal effectiveness, the implementation of e-Litigation in Malang City shows a promising direction of development, although it is not yet fully optimal. Strengthening public education, increasing digital legal literacy, and adapting community legal culture are necessary to ensure that the system can operate more efficiently and accountably.

Police officers employ numerous tactics to elicit incriminating statements from an accused. For instance, law enforcement officials will sometimes insert undercover police officers into a detention cell to procure evidence – cell-plant operations. During the 1990s, the Supreme Court of Canada held that where undercover state agents actively elicit incriminating statements from an accused while in detention, such conduct violates the latter’s right to silence situated in section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”). Remaining silent is a legitimate way to resist the power of the state when it conducts investigations. Police officers undermine this right and ability to resist when dispatching undercover officers in this manner, since an accused is unaware that they are speaking to state agents. However, an accused person with the assistance of their lawyer(s) may further resist the prosecution’s intended use of these incriminating statements through litigation – specifically, applications to exclude evidence under the Charter. While the Court has not considered cell-plant cases since 1999, Canadian trial courts at the superior court level have developed the right to silence jurisprudence concerning cell-plant cases. In addition, the Supreme Court of New Zealand has adopted the legal tests formulated by its Canadian counterpart. This article examines this jurisprudence, revealing how some decision-makers are showing sensitivity to the spatial context in which these operations occur. The case law also exposes how undercover officers may impact their exchanges with accused persons by building temporary and situational relationships with them. This is despite the lack of a prior relationship between the accused and undercover agent(s). In turn, this raises concerns about whether state actors have actively elicited incriminating statements from an accused. The jurisprudence also highlights how undercover officers are engaging in the functional equivalent of an interrogation despite the Supreme Court of Canada’s decisions in the 1990s admonishing against these tactics. An examination of this jurisprudence provides tools to challenge prosecution attempts to use cell-plant statements in future cases.

Purpose The case study aims to examine the ethical and leadership challenges faced by Patanjali as it navigates public health claims, marketing practices and regulatory scrutiny. It allows students to analyse the responsibilities of business leaders when personal credibility influences consumer trust, especially in sectors impacting public welfare. The case study encourages application of ethical frameworks, stakeholder analysis and decision-making models to assess how firms balance commercial interests with societal obligations. Students explore how ethical lapses, misleading claims and legal consequences affect brand reputation, consumer protection and leadership accountability in highly competitive markets. Design/methodology/approach The case is based on secondary research from business magazine articles, news reports, videos, academic journals and market reports. Findings Patanjali disrupted the FMCG market with its understanding of the market opportunity and how personal influence can become a means to manage competition and their reason for low pricing to capture market share. Was the Supreme Court’s judgement hearing to Indian Medical Association’s (IMAs) allegation on Patanjali adequate to prevent repeat offence. Asokan fought Patanjali in his role as IMA President and had to pay from his personal funds when he violated a code of conduct expectation. Was he going to continue with his crusade, or should he give up is a moral dilemma that needs to be investigated. Any expectation from Patanjali and IMA must be based on the understanding of the desire of its leaders. Research limitations/implications The case study is based only on secondary research from business magazine articles, news reports, videos, academic journals and market reports. The exhaustive research covered major news coverage and video footage of the issues highlighted in the case. The absence of primary interaction of the case writer with the various stakeholders in the case is its major limitation. However, much has been covered in news reports and these statements are introduced as said by them in interviews. Practical implications Students will be able to discuss and debate the question of ethics and business growth and the need for compliance with consumer protection laws. Students and industry practitioners can derive lessons on moral dilemma, prudence, responsible influence marketing, action and character, court trial and justice. The case may be used to discuss the question of culture and context in dealing with ethical issues around a business. Social implications Patanjali’s public apology for promoting misleading advertisements and the reverse stand during the press conference was a major concern in following law on consumer rights. There is a need to examine the role of influential leaders in the ethical business practices. When businesses like Patanjali positioned itself as natural and ayurvedic in composition, they were not always evidence-based in their approach and claim. Such businesses flourish despite law and whether Patanjali will continue to grow is to be seen. Finally, it questions the court trial against R V Asokan and whether justice was served when the case was closed on 13 August 2024. Originality/value To the best of author’ knowledge, this case is completely original in compilation. No AI tool was used for research writing and compilation. However, to improve language and correct errors in syntax and punctuation, ChatGPT was used. The references of all public sources have been meticulously captured and are taken entirely from the public domain. The work is done by one author, and no other party was engaged in its creation. The case was not funded, and the author needs no permission to publish the line and logic of its construction. The material was designed for teaching business ethics to students in management colleges at graduate and postgraduate levels and should be evaluated from that perspective.

The task of every trial since the dawn of time has been to reach the truth and establish the factual state with a broad explanation of various facts and evidence. One of the important pieces of evidence has always been the testimony of witnesses, but since ancient times they have been approached with a certain amount of caution. This is exemplified by the Code of Hammurabi, which already in its first paragraphs addresses the issue of responsibility for the spoken word, and the Latin maxim Unus testis, nullus testis, describing the rule of evidence law. According to this legal principle, unconfirmed testimony from one witness should be rejected, because it is considered too unreliable to establish a fact. This principle had its roots in biblical sources and Roman law. The books of penance, which were created in the era of late Christian antiquity and the early Middle Ages and which are evidence of the development of penitential practice in the Church, stood, like ancient legal cultures, also on guard so that witnesses testifying in court trials were guided only by the truth, so that false testimony would not contribute to an unjust verdict. The aim of the article is to show, in the light of the books of penance against the background of ancient laws, what consequences threatened a person who answered affirmatively to the question that, according to Bishop Burchard of Worms, should be asked of the penitent: “Have you been a false witness, that is, have you testified falsely and claimed that what was false was true? If yes, did you do it for the sake of love for someone, for a financial benefit, or out of fear?”

Virtual reality platforms are becoming more frequent tools used in academic settings, but more research is needed to explore the many ways in which virtual reality may be beneficial to student outcomes. This study explores the effectiveness of role-playing during a virtual court trial on increasing knowledge and empathy among criminal justice students (N = 25). Results show that role-playing in a virtual court trial related to increases in knowledge, but there were no meaningful changes to empathy. Results also show that students enrolled in criminal courts classes reported lower levels of empathy than those enrolled in the juvenile justice class, and that students in the Spring 2025 semester reported lower levels of empathy than those in the Fall 2023 semester. Finally, results reveal that students enrolled in the criminal courts classes experience lower levels of knowledge gains than those enrolled in the juvenile justice class.