Why are certain provisions of extraordinary legal remedies in law on misdemeanors unusable

Example of violation of right on defense

Abstract

The paper analyzes the specific provisions of extraordinary legal remedies in the Law on Misdemeanors. It is found that their application in practice would make a series of difficult obstacles to surmount. The paper is conceived through monitoring the imaginary case from the angle of person convicted by legally binding judgment in a misdemeanor proceeding. Attempt to apply extraordinary legal remedies from Law on Misdemeanors reveals their uselessness. In particular, the proportions of noncompliance between the Constitution and the Law on the Constitutional Court on the one hand, and the provisions of the Law on Misdemeanors relating to the reason for renewal of misdemeanor proceedings - “Violation of constitutionally guaranteed rights as determined by the Constitutional Court”, on the other. It is concluded that the provisions of extraordinary legal remedies in the Law on Misdemeanors, have such disadvantages that make them ineffective remedies. In order to facilitate transparency, paper is exhibited in two separate parts. Each section refers to one extraordinary legal remedy. The parts are exhibited in theses. Theses do not have subtitles. It is pointed to the reader that the defendant in misdemeanor proceeding can be convicted without having any knowledge of an ongoing misdemeanor proceeding. Person obtains the knowledge of that only when he is delivered the judgment. Through the paper, the reader is introduced with the opportunities that such a defendant are available when contesting the judgment. In the end, the reader acquires a vague sense of insecurity. A misdemeanor “can happen” to him.