Chương IV Luật Tư pháp người chưa thành niên 2024: Thủ tục xem xét, quyết định áp dụng biện pháp xử lý chuyển hướng

Chapter IV

PROCEDURES FOR REVIEWING AND DECIDING ON APPLICATION OF DIVERSION MEASURES

Section 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 52. Authority to apply diversion measures

1. The heads, deputy heads of investigation authorities, directors, and deputy directors of the Procuracy shall have the authority to apply community-based diversion measures, except in cases where the case requires damage payment or asset seizure.

2. Judges, adjudication panels shall have the authority to apply diversion measures as stipulated in Article 36 of this Law

Article 53. Requesting social workers to participate in legal proceedings

1. Immediately after pressing charge against a juvenile suspect, the investigation authority must request social workers on the list specified in clause 5 of Article 32 of this Law to participate in the legal proceedings.  If necessary, requests may be made directly, by phone, or through other electronic means but must be followed up with a written request.

2. Selection of social workers should follow the following priority order:

a) Officials, public employees, and workers who are social workers residing in the same commune-level administrative unit as the juvenile;

b) Officials, public employees, and workers who are social workers residing in the same district-level administrative unit as the juvenile;

c) Child protection social workers or cultural-social officials at the commune where the juvenile resides.

d) Other social workers as prescribed by law.

3. Within 01 day of receiving the investigation authority's request, social workers must respond in writing regarding their participation in the legal proceedings.  If necessary, notifications can be made directly, by phone, or through other electronic means but must be followed up with a written response.

4. Within one day of the social worker confirming participation in the proceedings, the investigation authority must issue a written notification regarding participation in the legal proceedings and send it to them. This notification must include a request for the social worker to prepare a social investigation report on the juvenile suspect.

The notification of the social worker's participation in the legal proceedings is valid throughout the legal proceedings.

5. Social workers are considered participants in the legal proceedings from the moment they receive the notification about their participation.

Article 54. Formulating social investigation reports

1. Within one day of the social worker confirming participation in the proceedings, the investigation authority must issue a written notification regarding participation in the legal proceedings and send it to them.

2. Social investigation reports must include:

a) Full name, date of birth, gender, personal identification number, place of residence of the juvenile;

b) Full name, place of residence of the representative of the juvenile;

c) Full name, place of work (if any) of the social worker;

d) Family relationships, living conditions of the juvenile;

dd) Maturity level of the juvenile;

e) Health history of the juvenile;

g) Learning, educational level and occupation of the juvenile;

h) Factors that may be the cause of juvenile delinquency;

i) Places and individuals that may lead the juvenile to commit new offenses (if any);

k) Proposal for application of Diversion measures (if any).

3. Relevant agencies, organizations and individuals shall provide information about juvenile suspects when requested by social workers.

4. At the request of the presiding authorities, social workers shall formulate supplementary social investigation reports during the investigation, prosecution, and adjudication.

Article 55. Consideration for application of diversion measures

1. Within 15 days from the date the investigation authority receives the social investigation report; within 7 days from the date the Procuracy receives the case file and the conclusion of investigation for charges, and the Court  receives the case file and the charge, the heads, deputy heads of the investigation authority, heads and vice heads of The Procuracy, or judges must base issue a notification on applying or not applying the diversion procedure in accordance with regulations of Articles 35, 37, 38, and 39 of this Law.

2. Notification on applying or not applying the diversion procedure shall include:

a) Number, date of issuance of the notification;

b) Name of the issuing agency;           

c) Full name of the heads, deputy heads of the investigation authority, heads and vice heads of The Procuracy, or judges issuing the notification;

d) Full name, date of birth, gender, personal identification number, place of residence, occupation, educational level of the juvenile suspects;

dd) Full name, place of work (if any) of the defense counsel;

e) Reasons, grounds for issuing the notification;

g) Application or non-application of the diversion procedure;

h) Recipient of the notification.

3. The notification on applying or not applying the diversion procedure shall be sent to the juvenile suspect, his/her representative, defense counsel, social worker and the Procuracy at the same level within 3 days of issuance.

4. Immediately after issuance of the notification, the investigation authority, Procuracy, or Court shall:

a) If the juvenile is found eligible for the community-based diversion measure, issue a written request to the social worker to formulate a diversion plan, except in cases specified in point b of this clause.

The request must include information on the nature and severity of the juvenile's crime and other necessary details for formulation of the diversion plan.

b) If the juvenile is found eligible for the community-based diversion measure with an existing diversion plan in the case file, the Procuracy or Court shall convene a meeting as stipulated in Article 59 of this Law if it deems unnecessary to amend or create a new diversion plan;

c) If the juvenile is deemed eligible for application of educational measures at reformatory, the Investigation authority or Procuracy shall submit a written request, along with the case file, to the Court for review and decision on applying educational measure at reformatory.

If the juvenile is deemed eligible for application of educational measure at reformatory, the Court shall review and decide the application of educational measure at reformatory.

5. During the diversion procedure, if payment of damage or asset seizure is required, the Investigation authority or Procuracy shall submit a written request, along with the case file, to the Court for review and decision on applying the diversion procedure and resolving issues regarding damage payment or asset seizure.

6. If the Investigation authority requests the Court to consider and decide the application of the diversion procedure according to the provisions in point c of clause 4 and clause 5 of this Article, the Investigation authority must notify the Procuracy of the corresponding level immediately.

7. The application of the diversion procedure does not terminate the necessary procedural activities to resolve the case

In cases where criminal proceedings are being simplified and a juvenile is found eligible for the diversion procedure, the Investigation authority, Procuracy, or Court shall decide to cancel the simplified procedure and resolve the case in accordance with this Law and the Criminal Procedure Code.

8. When issuing a notification on not applying Diversion procedure, the Investigation authority, the Procuracy, and the Court shall continue to resolve the case in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code and this Law.

9. The Head of the Supreme People’s Procuracy shall take charge and cooperate with the Chief Justice of the Supreme People's Court, the Minister of Public Security, and the Minister of National Defense, shall elaborate points 4, 5, and 7 of this Article.

Article 56.  Decision on applying Diversion measures  

1. Decision on applying Diversion measures must include:

a) Number, date of issuance of the decision;

b) Name of the issuing agency;

c) Full name of the heads, deputy heads of the Investigation authority, the Director, Deputy Director of the Procuracy, Judge or Adjudication Council that issue the decision;

d) Full name, date of birth, gender, personal identification number, place of residence, occupation, educational level of the juvenile;

dd) Full name, place of work (if any) of the defense counsel;

e) Crime, article, clause, and point of the Criminal Code applied;

g) Reasons, grounds for issuing the decision;

h) Decision on applying or not applying Diversion measures.

The name of the diversion measure that apply, the duration of application, the duration of fulfilling obligations, suspending the investigation of the case against the suspect, or suspending the case against the suspect subject to the diversion measure, and the cancellation of preventive measures, coercive measures, return of temporarily seized documents or objects (if any), handling of evidence, and other related issues must be clearly stated.

i)  Responsibilities of agencies, organizations, individuals enforcing the decision;

k) Effect of the decision

l) Recipient of the decision.

2. The decision on applying Diversion measures shall come into force on the date of publication.

This decision may be appealed, except in cases specified in clause 6 of Article 151 of this Law; or be petitioned, except in cases specified in Article 4 of this Law and clause 6 of Article 151 of this Law.

3. Within 5 days from the date of publication the decision on applying or not applying the community-based diversion measure, the Investigation authority, Procuracy, and Court shall take the following actions:

a) Deliver the decision to the juvenile suspect, their legal representative; send it to the Procuracy of the corresponding level, the victim; send it to the corresponding level of the investigation authority in cases where the Procuracy makes the decision;

b) Send the decision on applying the community-based diversion measure and a copy of the social investigation report to the People's Committee at the commune where the juvenile resides;

c) Send the decision on applying the diversion measure of paying damages to the civil judgment-enforcing agencies.

4. If the decision on applying or not applying the community-based diversion measure of the Investigation authority is unfounded or unlawful, within 5 days from receiving the decision, the Procuracy shall resolve as follows and provide clear reasons:

a) Make a decision to annul that decision and request the investigation authority to continue resolving the case in accordance with this Law and the Criminal Procedure Code;

b) Make a decision to annul the decision on not applying/applying the community-based diversion measure and request the investigation authority to reconvene to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure, except in cases specified in point c of this clause.

Within 5 days from receiving the decision specified in this point, the investigation authority must reconvene to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure;

c) In cases where the case file and the conclusion of the investigation for charges have already been transferred to the Procuracy, the Procuracy shall review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure in accordance with this Law.

5. Within 5 days from the date of publication the decision on applying or not applying the educational measure at reformatory, the Court shall take the following actions:

a) Deliver the decision to the juvenile suspect, their legal representative; send it to the Procuracy of the corresponding level, the victim; send it to the agency requesting the application of the educational measure at reformatory (if any);

b) Send the decision on applying the educational measure at reformatory and a copy of the social investigation report to the criminal judgment enforcement agency of a district-level Police where the juvenile resides;

c) Return the case file to the investigation authority, Procuracy that made the request in cases where the Court does not accept the request to apply the educational measure at reformatory as stipulated in clause 1 of Article 68 of this Law.

Article 57. Handling of cases where person serving diversion measure commit another crime

In cases where individuals under diversion measures are prosecuted for other crimes, they shall not be prosecuted for the crime for which the diversion measure is applied.

Section 2. PROCEDURES FOR REVIEWING AND DECIDING ON APPLICATION OF COMMUNITY-BASED DIVERSION MEASURES

Article 58. Formulating diversion plans

1. Within 07 day of receiving the investigation authority's request, Procuracy, Court, social workers must formulate diversion plan and send it to the requesting agency.  

2. The Diversion plan must include:

a) The proposed Diversion measures;

b) Duration and place of implementation;

c) Rights and obligations of juveniles in accordance with Article 23 of this Law;

d) Responsibilities of the relevant agencies, organizations, individuals in enforcement of the decision on applying the diversion measure.

3. When necessary, the social worker may request the agency handling the current case to provide information or organize a meeting to formulate the diversion plan. The meeting, chaired by the social worker, must involve the representative of the juvenile suspect, and may include the juvenile suspect, victim or their legal representative.

 If the proposed diversion measure involves participation in educational programs, vocational training, treatment, or psychological counseling for the juvenile, the social worker must cooperate with educational institutions, vocational education institutions, medical establishments, or other relevant organizations or individuals to specify the content, educational programs, vocational training, treatment, or psychological counseling suitable for the juvenile.

4. At the request of the presiding authorities, social workers shall formulate supplementary diversion plan during the investigation, prosecution, and adjudication.

Article 59. Decision for convening a meeting to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure

1. Within 3 days from the date receiving the diversion plan or from the date of issuance of notification on applying the diversion procedure if falling under the cases specified in point b of clause 4 of Article 55 of this Law, the Head, Deputy Head of the investigation authority, Director, Deputy Director of the Procuracy, or Judge shall make a decision on convening a meeting to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure.

2. Decision on convening a meeting must include:

a) Date of issuance, name of the issuing agency;

b) Date, place of the offline/online meeting;

c) Full name, date of birth, gender, personal identification number, place of residence of the juvenile suspect;

d) Full name, place of residence of the representative of the juvenile suspect;

dd) Full name of the heads, deputy heads of the investigation authority, heads and vice heads of the Procuracy, or Judge presiding over the meeting; Meeting clerk;

e) Full name of procurators participating in the meeting convened by the Investigation authority, Court;

g) Full name, place of work (if any) of the defense counsel;

h) Full name, place of work (if any) of the social worker;

i) Full name of the interpretation (if any);

k) Full name of other people required to participate in the meeting (if any).

3. Participants in the meeting include:

a) Meeting conductors: Head or Deputy Head of the investigation authority; Head and Deputy Head of the Procuracy; Judge; Meeting clerk;

b) Meeting attendees: Prosecutors participating in the meeting convened by the Investigation authority, Court; Investigators participating in the meeting convened by the Procuracy;

c) Others: the juvenile suspect, their legal representative, defense counsel; social worker; victim (if any);

d) When necessary, the Investigation authority, Procuracy, Court may request experts such as appraisers, interpreters, translators, medical, psychological, educational, social work experts, representatives of educational institutions, vocational education institutions where the juvenile suspect studies, representatives of agencies and organizations where the juvenile suspect works, representatives of the Vietnam Fatherland Front Committee at the commune level, member organizations of the Front where the juvenile suspect resides, and other people to attend the meeting.

4. The decision on convening the meeting must be sent to the individuals specified in point c of clause 3 of this Article, the Procuracy of the corresponding level, the Investigation authority in cases where the Procuracy convenes the meeting immediately after the decision is issued. The meeting to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure must be organized within 5 days from the date of issuing the decision to convene the meeting.

Article 60. Meeting to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure

1. Before the meeting begins, the meeting clerk shall check the presence of those requested by the Investigation authority, Procuracy, or Court to participate in the meeting; if someone is absent, the reason must be clarified and reported to the meeting chairperson for a decision on whether to proceed or postpone the meeting.

2. The meeting procedure is conducted as follows:

a) The meeting chairperson shall open the meeting;

b) The social worker shall present the Diversion plan;

c) The juvenile suspect and their representative shall present their opinions;

d) The defense counsel shall present their opinions;

dd) Other participants shall present their opinions to clarify relevant issues;

e) The meeting chairperson shall ask questions to clarify relevant issues;

g) The prosecutor shall express their opinions;

h) The chairperson shall decide whether to apply or not apply the diversion measure and announce the decision content immediately at the meeting.

If the juvenile is deemed eligible for application of educational measures at reformatory or if there are requests to address issues regarding damage payment or asset seizure, the Investigation authority or Procuracy shall submit a written request, along with the case file, to the Court for review and decision on applying educational measures at reformatory.

If the juvenile is deemed eligible for application of educational measure at reformatory, the Judge shall review and decide the application of educational measure at reformatory.

3. Meetings to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure must be juvenile-friendly, ensure lawful rights and obligations of juveniles. Questions for juveniles must be age-appropriate and gender-sensitive and consider their cognitive abilities and maturity level. Questions should be brief, simple, and easy to understand, and not cover multiple issues at once.  The legal representative of the juvenile can assist them during the meeting.

4. The Investigation authority, Procuracy, Court may postpone the meeting in the following cases:

a) The interpreter is absent, and there is no immediate replacement available;

b) The juvenile suspect or their representative is absent for the first time with a valid reason.

5. The meeting must not be postponed for more than 05 days from the date of issuance of the postponement decision. The postponement decision must be promptly sent to those present at the meeting; sent to the Procuracy of the corresponding level and the absent individuals within 3 days from the date of issuance.

Article 61. Minute of meeting to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure

1. The minutes of the meeting to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure must clearly record the date and location of the meeting; participants in the meeting; the content and proceedings of the meeting; the decision of the meeting chairperson.

2. After the meeting, the chairperson must review the minutes, and together with the clerk, sign the minutes.

Article 62. Procedures of the court for reviewing and deciding application of community-based Diversion measures at the request of the Investigation authority, the Procuracy

1. Immediately upon receiving the request, along with the case file from the Investigation authority, the Procuracy as stipulated in clause 5 of Article 55 and point h of clause 2 of Article 60 of this Law, the Chief Justice of the Court must assign a Judge to handle the case. Within 3 days from the assignment date, the Judge shall take the following actions:

a) If there is already a diversion plan in the case file, the Judge will make a decision to convene a meeting to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure, except when additional documents are needed;

b) If there is no diversion plan in the case file, the Judge will request the social worker to formulate a diversion plan in accordance with Article 58 of this Law. Within 3 days from the date receiving the diversion plan, the Judge will make a decision on convening a meeting to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure.

2. If the suspect is held in detention, the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice will review and decide whether to continue with the detention or replace it with other preventive measures in accordance with this Law and the Criminal Procedure Code.

Preventive measure will apply until the Court discloses a decision on the application of the diversion measure.

3. The decision on convening a meeting, meeting participants, meeting opening time, meeting postponement, meeting minutes, and request for additional documents will comply with the corresponding regulations in Clauses 2, 3 and 4 of Article 64, Article 65, Clauses 4 and 5 of Article 66 and Article 67 of this Law.

4. Before the meeting begins, the meeting clerk shall check the presence of those requested by the Court to participate in the meeting; if someone is absent, the reason must be clarified and reported to the Judge for a decision on whether to proceed or postpone the meeting. The meeting procedure is conducted as follows:

a) The Judge shall open the meeting;

b) The representative of the requesting agency shall present the request;

c) The social worker shall present the Diversion plan;

d) The juvenile suspect, their representative, defense counsel shall present their opinions;

dd) Other participants shall present their opinions to clarify relevant issues;

e) e) The judge shall question the representative of the requesting agency, the juvenile suspect, their representative and other people attending the meeting to clarify relevant issues;

g) The juvenile suspect, their legal representative, and their defense counsel shall debate about relevant issues. The debate is conducted under the Judge's guidance. Participants have the right to respond to each other's opinions. The Judge must not limit the debate time, allowing participants to present their arguments fully; the Judge may request others to refrain from presenting irrelevant or repetitive arguments;

h) The prosecutor shall express their opinion;

i) The Judge shall decide whether to apply or not apply the community-based diversion measure or decide the application of the educational measure at reformatory if the juvenile is deemed eligible for educational measure at reformatory; resolve the issue of damage payment or asset seizure; and publish the content of the decision immediately at the meeting.

The decision on detention for the juvenile subject to the educational measure at reformatory shall comply with clause 6 of Article 66 of this Law.

5. Meetings to review and decide the application of the community-based diversion measure must be conducted in a friendly manner as stipulated in clause 3 of Article 60 of this Law.

6. Within 5 days from the date of announcing the decision on applying/not applying the diversion measure, the Court shall take the following actions:

a) Deliver the decision to the juvenile suspect, their legal representative; send it to the Procuracy of the corresponding level, the victim, the requesting agency;

b) Send the decision on applying the community-based diversion measure and a copy of the social investigation report to the People's Committee at the commune where the juvenile resides;

c) Send the to the civil judgment-enforcing agency at the same level as the Court that issued the decision;

d) Send the decision on applying the educational measure at reformatory and a copy of the social investigation report to the criminal judgment enforcement agency of a district-level Police where the juvenile resides;

e) Return the case file to the Investigation authority, the Procuracy that made the request in cases of refusal for further case resolution in accordance with Criminal Procedure Code and this Law.

Section 3. Procedures for reviewing, deciding the application of educational measures at reformatory

Article 63. Procedures for reviewing, deciding the application of educational measures at reformatory

1. The Court shall review and decide to apply the educational measure at reformatory in the following cases:

a) Upon requested by the Investigation authority or the Procuracy as specified in point c of clause 4 of Article 55 and point h of clause 2 of Article 60 of this Law;

b) If the juvenile is deemed eligible for application of educational measure at reformatory by the Court in accordance with this Law.

2. Immediately upon receiving the request, along with the case file from the Investigation authority, the Procuracy as stipulated in point a of clause 1 of this Article 55, the Chief Justice of the Court must assign a Judge to handle the case.

3. If the suspect is held in detention, the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice will review and decide whether to continue with the detention or replace it with other preventive measures in accordance with this Law and the Criminal Procedure Code.

Preventive measure will apply until the Court public a decision on the application of the educational measure at reformatory.

Article 64. Decision on convening a meeting for reviewing, deciding the application of educational measures at reformatory

1. Within 7 days from the date of assignment in accordance with clause 2 of Article 63 of this Law, or during the adjudication preparation phase as specified in point b of clause 1 of Article 63 of this Law, the Judge must make a decision to convene a meeting to review and decide the application of the educational measure at the reformatory, except as provided in Article 65 of this Law.

2. Decision on convening a meeting must include:

a) Date of issuance, name of the issuing Court;

b) Date, place of the offline/online meeting;

c) Full name, date of birth, gender, personal identification number, place of residence of the juvenile suspect;

d) Full name, place of residence of the representative of the juvenile suspect;

dd) Name of the requesting agency;

e) Full name of the Judge, meeting clerk;

g) Full name of the procurator participating in the meeting;

h) Full name, place of work (if any) of the defense counsel;

i) Full name, place of work (if any) of the social worker;

k) Full name of the interpretation (if any);

l) Full name of other people required to participate in the meeting (if any).

3. Meeting participants include:

a) Meeting conductors: Judge; Meeting clerk;

b) Meeting attendees: representative of the requesting agency, Prosecutor participating in the meeting;

c) Others: the juvenile suspect, their legal representative, defense counsel; social worker; victim (if any);

d) When necessary, the Investigation authority, Procuracy, Court may request experts such as appraisers, interpreters, translators, medical, psychological, educational, social work experts, representatives of educational institutions, vocational education institutions where the juvenile suspect studies, representatives of agencies and organizations where the juvenile suspect works, representatives of the Vietnam Fatherland Front Committee at the commune level, member organizations of the Front where the juvenile suspect resides, and other people to attend the meeting.

4. The decision on convening the meeting must be sent to the individuals specified in point c of clause 3 of this Article, the requesting agency, and the Procuracy of the corresponding level immediately after the decision is issued. The meeting to review and decide the application of the educational measure at reformatory must be organized within 5 days from the date of issuing the decision to convene the meeting.

Article 65. Request for additional documentation

1. The Judge shall request the Investigation authority, Procuracy to provide additional documentation in cases where the case file is unclear or contradictory and requires clarification.

2. The request must specify the documents needing supplementation and the reason for the request.

3. Within 5 days from the date of receiving the Court's request, the requested agency must send the supplemental documents to the Court. If the documents cannot be provided, a written response must be given, stating the reasons.

4. Within 5 days from the date of receiving the supplemental documents or from the expiration of the deadline as prescribed in clause 3 of this Article, if the requested agency fails to provide the documents, the Judge will issue a decision to convene a meeting to review and decide the application of the educational measure at reformatory.

Article 66. Meeting for reviewing, deciding the application of educational measures at reformatory

1. Before the meeting begins, the meeting clerk shall check the presence of those requested by the Court to participate in the meeting; if someone is absent, the reason must be clarified and reported to the Judge for a decision on whether to proceed or postpone the meeting.

2. The meeting procedure is conducted as follows:

a) The Judge shall open the meeting;

b) The representative of the requesting agency shall present the request;

C) The juvenile suspect, their representative, defense counsel shall present their opinions;

d) The social worker participates in the meeting shall present the social investigation report;

dd) Other participants shall present their opinions to clarify relevant issues;

e) The judge shall question the representative of the requesting agency, the juvenile suspect, their representative and other people attending the meeting to clarify relevant issues;

g) The juvenile suspect, their legal representative, and their defense counsel shall debate about relevant issues with the representative of the requesting agency. The debate shall be conducted under the Judge's guidance. Participants have the right to respond to each other's opinions. The Judge must not limit the debate time, allowing participants to present their arguments fully; the Judge may request others to refrain from presenting irrelevant or repetitive arguments;

h) The prosecutor shall express their opinion;

i) The Judge shall decide whether to apply or not apply the educational measure at reformatory and announce the decision content immediately at the meeting.

3. Meetings to review and decide the application of the educational measure at reformatory must be conducted in a friendly manner as stipulated in clause 3 of Article 60 of this Law.  

4. The Court may postpone the meeting in the following cases:

a) The representative of the requesting agency is absent;

b) The interpreter is absent, and there is no immediate replacement available;

c) The juvenile suspect or their representative is absent for the first time with a valid reason.

5. The meeting must not be postponed for more than 05 days from the date of issuance of the postponement decision. The postponement decision must be promptly sent to those present at the meeting; sent to the Procuracy of the corresponding level and the absent individuals within 3 days from the date of issuance.

6. The Judge shall decide to hold the juvenile in detention until the district-level criminal judgment enforcement agency of a district-level police hands them over to the reformatory if:

a) The juvenile is currently detained but it is deemed necessary to continue with the detention to ensure the implementation of the educational measure at reformatory;

b) The juvenile is not held in detention, but there are grounds to believe they may flee or commit further offenses.

Article 67. Minute of meeting for reviewing, deciding the application of educational measures at reformatory

1. The minutes of the meeting to review and decide the application of the educational measures at reformatory must clearly record the date and location of the meeting; participants in the meeting; the content and proceedings of the meeting; the decision of the Judge.

2. After the meeting, the Judge must review the minutes, and together with the Clerk, sign the minutes.

Article 68. Handling of cases where the Court does not apply the educational measure at reformatory

1. If the Court does not accept the request from the Investigation authority, Procuracy to apply the educational measure at reformatory, the Court shall return the case file to the Investigation authority, Procuracy to continue resolving the case as per the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and this Law.

2. If the Court convenes a meeting to review and decide the application of the educational measure at reformatory but decides not to apply this measure to the juvenile suspect, the Court will proceed to resolve the case in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code and this Law.

Section 4. COMPLAINT AND PETITION AGAINST DECISION ON APPLYING DIVERSION MEASURES

Article 69. Persons with rights to file complaints and petitions against decisions on applying diversion measures

1. When there are grounds to believe that the decision on applying diversion is against the law, the rights to file petitions shall be exercised as follows:

a) The Investigation authority participating in the meeting to review and decide the application of diversion measures has the right to file a petition against decision on applying/not applying diversion measures of the Procuracy, Court;

b) The Procuracy at the same level has the right to file a petition against decision on applying/not applying diversion measures of the Court, except as prescribed in clause 6 of Article 151 of this Law.

2. Suspects who are juveniles, victims, their legal representatives have the right to complain about the decision on applying/not applying diversion measures if there are grounds that the decision is against the law, infringing on their lawful rights and interests.

Article 70. Time limit for complaints and petitions

The time limit for filing a complaint and petition is 5 days from the date of publication or receipt of the decision on applying/not applying diversion measures.

In cases of force majeure or objective obstacles preventing the exercise of the right to file a complaint within the specified time limit, the time period due to such force majeure or objective obstacles shall not be included in the complaint deadline.

Article 71. Authority and time limit for resolving complaints and petitions

1. Complaints against decisions on applying/not applying diversion measures made by the Deputy Head of the Investigation authority are reviewed and resolved by the Head of Investigation authority within 3 days from the date of receiving the complaints.

Complaints against decisions on applying/not applying diversion measures made by the Deputy Head of the Investigation authority are reviewed and resolved by the Chief Procurator of the Procuracy within 3 days from the date of receiving the complaints.

2. Complaints, petitions against decisions on applying/not applying diversion measures made by the Deputy Chief Procurator of the Procuracy are reviewed and resolved by the Chief Procurator of the Procuracy within 3 days from the date of receiving the complaints, petitions.

Complaints, petitions against decisions on applying/not applying diversion measures made by the Chief Procurator of the Procuracy are reviewed and resolved by the Head of the immediate superior Procuracy within 05 days from the date of receiving the complaints, petitions.

Complaints, petitions against decisions on applying/not applying diversion measures made by the Deputy Head of the provincial Procuracy are reviewed and resolved by the Head of the Supreme People’s Procuracy within 10 days from the date of receiving the complaints, petitions.  

3. Complaints, petitions against decisions on applying/not applying diversion measures made by the Judge are reviewed and resolved by the Procurator General of the Supreme People’s Procuracy within 03 days from the date of receiving the complaints, petitions.  

Complaints, petitions against decisions on applying/not applying diversion measures made by the Judge who is currently the Chief Justice are reviewed and resolved by the Chief Justice of the immediate superior Court within 07 days from the date of receiving the complaints, petitions.  

Article 72. Resolving complaints and petitions

1. Within the time limit prescribed in Article 71 of this Law, the person with authority to resolve complaints and petitions must make one of the following decisions:

a) Accepting the complaint or petition and cancelling the decision on applying diversion measures to continue resolving the case in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code and this Law;

b) Accepting the complaint or petition and cancelling the decision on not applying/applying diversion measures and requesting the competent authority or person to reopen the meeting to review and decide the application of diversion measures.

Within 5 days from the date of receiving the decision to resolve the complaint or petition, the competent authority, person must reopen the meeting to review and decide the application of diversion measures;

c) Rejecting the complaint, petition and keeping the applicable decision on applying/not applying diversion measures.

2. Within 3 days from the date of issuance of the decision, the person with authority to resolve complaints and petitions must send the decision to resolve the complaint or petition to the person who filed it, the Procuracy of the same level, the juvenile and their legal representative, and the criminal judgment enforcement agency of a district-level police where the juvenile is residing in cases specified in points a and b of clause 1 of this Article.

3. The decision to resolve the complaint or petition is legally effective and final.

4. If the case file and the conclusion of the investigation for charges have been transferred to the Procuracy, the person with authority to resolve complaints as stipulated in clause 1 of Article 71 of this Law shall make a decision to suspend the settlement of the complaint.

If the case file and the charge have been transferred to the Procuracy, the person with authority to resolve complaints and petitions as stipulated in clause 2 of Article 71 of this Law shall make a decision to suspend the settlement of the complaint, petition.

Bài viết liên quan

Tội giết người được là loại tội phạm gì theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Tội giết người được là loại tội phạm gì theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Trong Bộ luật Hình sự năm 2025, tội giết người tiếp tục được xác định là một trong những tội phạm đặc biệt nghiêm trọng, thuộc nhóm tội xâm phạm tính mạng con người – nhóm quyền cơ bản và tối thượng nhất được pháp luật bảo vệ. Với bản chất là hành vi cố ý tước đoạt tính mạng người khác, tội danh này không chỉ gây hậu quả nghiêm trọng về mặt nhân thân mà còn làm mất an ninh trật tự xã hội. Vậy, theo phân loại của pháp luật hình sự hiện hành, tội giết người được xếp vào loại tội phạm nào? Bài viết sau sẽ phân tích căn cứ pháp lý và cơ sở phân loại tội phạm theo Bộ luật Hình sự 2025 để làm rõ vấn đề này. 16/06/2025

Thế nào là lỗi cố ý gián tiếp trong tội giết người theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Thế nào là lỗi cố ý gián tiếp trong tội giết người theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Trong hệ thống pháp luật hình sự Việt Nam, tội giết người được quy định tại Điều 123 Bộ luật Hình sự năm 2015. Một trong những yếu tố quan trọng để xác định trách nhiệm hình sự trong tội danh này là lỗi của người phạm tội, bao gồm lỗi cố ý trực tiếp và lỗi cố ý gián tiếp. Lỗi cố ý gián tiếp xảy ra khi người phạm tội nhận thức rõ hành vi của mình là nguy hiểm cho xã hội, thấy trước hậu quả có thể xảy ra, tuy không mong muốn nhưng vẫn có ý thức để mặc cho hậu quả xảy ra . Bài viết này sẽ phân tích chi tiết khái niệm lỗi cố ý gián tiếp trong tội giết người theo quy định mới nhất của Bộ luật Hình sự năm 2025, giúp bạn đọc hiểu rõ hơn về cách áp dụng pháp luật trong thực tiễn. 16/06/2025

Tội giết người vượt quá phòng vệ chính đáng mức phạt mới nhất 2025 bao nhiêu?

Tội giết người vượt quá phòng vệ chính đáng mức phạt mới nhất 2025 bao nhiêu?

Trong hệ thống pháp luật hình sự Việt Nam, phòng vệ chính đáng là quyền hợp pháp nhằm bảo vệ bản thân hoặc người khác khỏi hành vi xâm hại. Tuy nhiên, khi hành vi phòng vệ vượt quá giới hạn cần thiết, gây hậu quả nghiêm trọng như tước đoạt tính mạng người khác, người thực hiện có thể bị truy cứu trách nhiệm hình sự. Theo quy định tại Điều 126 Bộ luật Hình sự, hành vi giết người do vượt quá giới hạn phòng vệ chính đáng hoặc vượt quá mức cần thiết khi bắt giữ người phạm tội có thể bị xử lý với mức phạt cải tạo không giam giữ đến 2 năm hoặc phạt tù từ 3 tháng đến 2 năm; nếu phạm tội đối với 2 người trở lên, mức phạt tù từ 2 năm đến 5 năm . Bài viết này sẽ phân tích chi tiết các quy định pháp luật liên quan và mức hình phạt áp dụng trong trường hợp này theo quy định mới nhất năm 2025. 16/06/2025

Tội giết người trong trạng thái tinh thần bị kích động mạnh mức xử lý hình sự mới nhất 2025 ra sao?

Tội giết người trong trạng thái tinh thần bị kích động mạnh mức xử lý hình sự mới nhất 2025 ra sao?

Trong hệ thống pháp luật hình sự Việt Nam, tội giết người là một trong những tội danh đặc biệt nghiêm trọng, xâm phạm trực tiếp đến quyền sống của con người. Tuy nhiên, không phải mọi hành vi nhằm tước đoạt mạng sống người khác đều hoàn tất; có những trường hợp người phạm tội không thực hiện được hành vi đến cùng vì những nguyên nhân ngoài ý muốn. Đây được gọi là "tội giết người chưa đạt". Vậy, hành vi giết người chưa đạt có bị xử lý hình sự không? Mức phạt mới nhất theo Bộ luật Hình sự năm 2025 là bao nhiêu? Bài viết này sẽ giúp bạn hiểu rõ hơn về khái niệm, căn cứ pháp lý và mức hình phạt áp dụng đối với tội giết người chưa đạt theo quy định hiện hành. 16/06/2025

Tội giết người không thành có bị xử lý hình sự? Mức phạt mới nhất 2025 bao nhiêu?

Tội giết người không thành có bị xử lý hình sự? Mức phạt mới nhất 2025 bao nhiêu?

Trong hệ thống pháp luật hình sự Việt Nam, tội giết người được xem là một trong những tội danh đặc biệt nghiêm trọng, xâm phạm trực tiếp đến quyền sống của con người. Tuy nhiên, không phải mọi hành vi nhằm tước đoạt mạng sống người khác đều hoàn tất; có những trường hợp người phạm tội không thực hiện được hành vi đến cùng vì những nguyên nhân ngoài ý muốn. Đây được gọi là "tội giết người chưa đạt" hoặc "giết người không thành". Vậy, hành vi giết người không thành có bị xử lý hình sự không? Mức phạt mới nhất theo Bộ luật Hình sự năm 2025 là bao nhiêu? Bài viết này sẽ giúp bạn hiểu rõ hơn về khái niệm, căn cứ pháp lý và mức hình phạt áp dụng đối với tội giết người không thành theo quy định hiện hành. 16/06/2025

Tội giết người chưa đạt có bị xử lý hình sự? Mức phạt mới nhất 2025 bao nhiêu?

Tội giết người chưa đạt có bị xử lý hình sự? Mức phạt mới nhất 2025 bao nhiêu?

Trong hệ thống pháp luật hình sự Việt Nam, tội giết người là một trong những tội danh đặc biệt nghiêm trọng, xâm phạm trực tiếp đến quyền sống của con người. Tuy nhiên, không phải mọi hành vi nhằm tước đoạt mạng sống người khác đều hoàn tất; có những trường hợp người phạm tội không thực hiện được hành vi đến cùng vì những nguyên nhân ngoài ý muốn. Đây được gọi là "tội giết người chưa đạt". Vậy, hành vi giết người chưa đạt có bị xử lý hình sự không? Mức phạt mới nhất theo Bộ luật Hình sự năm 2025 là bao nhiêu? Bài viết này sẽ giúp bạn hiểu rõ hơn về khái niệm, căn cứ pháp lý và mức hình phạt áp dụng đối với tội giết người chưa đạt theo quy định hiện hành. 16/06/2025

4 yếu tố quan trọng cấu thành tội giết người theo BLHS mới nhất 2025

4 yếu tố quan trọng cấu thành tội giết người theo BLHS mới nhất 2025

Dưới ánh sáng của Bộ luật Hình sự năm 2025 – phiên bản mới nhất phản ánh sự thay đổi và hoàn thiện của hệ thống pháp luật hình sự Việt Nam – tội giết người tiếp tục được quy định là một trong những tội danh đặc biệt nghiêm trọng, xâm phạm trực tiếp đến quyền sống – quyền cơ bản nhất của con người. Để xác định một hành vi có cấu thành tội giết người hay không, cần phải phân tích đầy đủ các yếu tố cấu thành tội phạm theo quy định của pháp luật. Bài viết này sẽ trình bày bốn yếu tố quan trọng cấu thành tội giết người theo BLHS 2025, từ đó giúp người đọc hiểu rõ hơn về căn cứ pháp lý và cách áp dụng trong thực tiễn tố tụng hình sự. 16/06/2025

Tội giết người Khoản 2 mức phạt cao nhất 15 năm tù theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Tội giết người Khoản 2 mức phạt cao nhất 15 năm tù theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Tội giết người là một trong những tội phạm đặc biệt nghiêm trọng được quy định tại Điều 123 Bộ luật Hình sự 2015, vẫn đang được áp dụng tính đến năm 2025. Theo đó, Khoản 2 của điều luật này quy định mức phạt tù từ 7 năm đến 15 năm đối với các hành vi giết người không thuộc các trường hợp quy định tại Khoản 1, tức là không có các tình tiết tăng nặng như giết nhiều người, giết người dưới 16 tuổi, giết phụ nữ có thai, giết người đang thi hành công vụ, hoặc vì động cơ đê hèn. Việc áp dụng hình phạt cụ thể trong khung hình phạt này phụ thuộc vào tính chất và mức độ nguy hiểm của hành vi phạm tội, hậu quả xảy ra, nhân thân người phạm tội, các tình tiết tăng nặng và giảm nhẹ trách nhiệm hình sự. Bài viết dưới đây sẽ phân tích chi tiết các quy định pháp luật hiện hành về tội giết người theo Khoản 2 Điều 123, cũng như các yếu tố ảnh hưởng đến việc quyết định hình phạt trong thực tiễn xét xử. 16/06/2025

Tội giết người Khoản 1 mức phạt cao nhất tử hình theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Tội giết người Khoản 1 mức phạt cao nhất tử hình theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Tội giết người được quy định tại Điều 123 Bộ luật Hình sự 2015 (sửa đổi, bổ sung năm 2017) và vẫn đang được áp dụng tính đến năm 2025. Theo đó, Khoản 1 của điều luật này quy định mức phạt tù từ 12 năm đến 20 năm, tù chung thân hoặc tử hình đối với các hành vi giết người có tính chất đặc biệt nghiêm trọng như. giết từ hai người trở lên, giết người dưới 16 tuổi, giết phụ nữ mà biết là có thai, giết người đang thi hành công vụ hoặc vì lý do công vụ của nạn nhân, giết ông, bà, cha, mẹ, người nuôi dưỡng, thầy giáo, cô giáo của mình, hoặc vì động cơ đê hèn. Việc áp dụng hình phạt cụ thể trong khung hình phạt này phụ thuộc vào tính chất và mức độ nguy hiểm của hành vi phạm tội, hậu quả xảy ra, nhân thân người phạm tội, các tình tiết tăng nặng và giảm nhẹ trách nhiệm hình sự. Bài viết dưới đây sẽ phân tích chi tiết các quy định pháp luật hiện hành về tội giết người theo Khoản 1 Điều 123, cũng như các yếu tố ảnh hưởng đến việc quyết định hình phạt trong thực tiễn xét xử. 16/06/2025

Tội giết người xử lý hình sự ra sao theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Tội giết người xử lý hình sự ra sao theo BLHS mới nhất 2025?

Tội giết người là một trong những tội phạm đặc biệt nghiêm trọng được quy định tại Điều 123 Bộ luật Hình sự 2015, vẫn đang được áp dụng tính đến năm 2025. Hành vi này bị xử lý nghiêm khắc với mức phạt tù từ 12 năm đến 20 năm, tù chung thân hoặc tử hình, tùy theo tính chất và mức độ vi phạm. Các tình tiết tăng nặng bao gồm. giết từ hai người trở lên, giết người dưới 16 tuổi, giết phụ nữ mà biết là có thai, giết người đang thi hành công vụ hoặc vì lý do công vụ của nạn nhân, giết ông, bà, cha, mẹ, người nuôi dưỡng, thầy giáo, cô giáo của mình. Bài viết dưới đây sẽ phân tích chi tiết các quy định pháp luật hiện hành về tội giết người, các tình tiết tăng nặng, giảm nhẹ và hướng dẫn áp dụng trong thực tiễn năm 2025. 16/06/2025