CanonLaw.Ninja

A resource for both professional and armchair canonists.

Also including the GIRM, GILH, CCC, CCEO, DC, SST, ESI, USCCB Norms, and Vos estis.

Search

  • Section Numbers
  • Text Search    

  • Documents
  •  

   

Document

Processes » The Penal Process » The preliminary investigation
Canon 1717. §1 Whenever the Ordinary receives information, which has at least the semblance of truth, about an offence, he is to enquire carefully, either personally or through some suitable person, about the facts and circumstances, and about the imputability of the offence, unless this enquiry would appear to be entirely superfluous.

§2 Care is to be taken that this investigation does not call into question anyone’s good name.

§3 The one who performs this investigation has the same powers and obligations as an auditor in a process. If, later, a judicial process is initiated, this person may not take part in it as a judge.

§1. Quoties Ordinarius notitiam, saltem veri similem, habet de delicto, caute inquirat, per se vel per aliam idoneam personam, circa facta et circumstantias et circa imputabilitatem, nisi haec inquisito omnino superflua videatur.

§2. Cavendum est ne ex hac investigatione bonum cuiusquam nomen in discrimen vocetur.

§3. Qui investigationem agit, easdem habet, quas auditor in processu, potestates et obligationes; idemque nequit, si postea iudicialis processus promoveatur, in eo iudicem agere.
Canon 1718. §1 When the facts have been assembled, the Ordinary is to decide:

1° whether a process to impose or declare a penalty can be initiated;

2° whether this would be expedient, bearing in mind can. 1341;

3° whether a judicial process is to be used or, unless the law forbids it, whether the matter is to proceed by means of an extra-judicial decree.

§2 The Ordinary is to revoke or change the decree mentioned in §1 whenever new facts indicate to him that a different decision should be made.

§3 In making the decrees referred to in §§1 and 2, the Ordinary, if he considers it prudent, is to consult two judges or other legal experts.

§4 Before making a decision in accordance with §1, the Ordinary is to consider whether, to avoid useless trials, it would be expedient, with the parties’ consent, for himself or the investigator to make a decision, according to what is good and equitable, about the question of harm.

§1. Cum satis collecta videantur elementa, decernat Ordinarius:

1° num processus ad poenam irrogandam vel declarandam promoveri possit;

2° num id, attento can. 1341, expediat;

3° utrum processus iudicialis sit adhibendus an, nisi lex vetet, sit procedendum per decretum extra iudicium.

§2. Ordinarius decretum, de quo in §1, revocet vel mutet, quoties ex novis elementis aliud sibi decernendum videtur.

§3. In ferendis decretis, de quibus in §§1 et 2, audiat Ordinarius, si prudenter censeat, duos iudices aliosve iuris peritos.

§4. Antequam ad normam §1 decernat, consideret Ordinarius num, ad vitanda inutilia iudicia, expediat ut, partibus consentientibus, vel ipse vel investigator quaestionem de damnis ex bono et aequo dirimat.
Canon 1719. The acts of the investigation, the decrees of the Ordinary by which the investigation was opened and closed, and all those matters which preceded the investigation, are to be kept in the secret curial archive, unless they are necessary for the penal process.

Investigationis acta et Ordinarii decreta, quibus investigatio initur vel clauditur, eaque omnia quae investigationem praecedunt, si necessaria non sint ad poenalem processum, in secreto curiae archivo custodiantur.

Page generated in 0.0029 seconds.