Problems of Work Organization in Expert Institutions

• Autorzy: Eglė Bilevičiūtė , Romualdas Drakšas , Vidmantas Egidijus Kurapka , Matulienė Snieguolė
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

One of the main responsibilities of public institutions is to ensure the safety of its citizens and protection of their rights. When addressing these challenges, particular importance is given to court expert investigations. The European Council raised the task: to create a unified European forensic science area until 2020. In order to carry out this task, it is necessary to achieve cooperation between different countries in the field of forensic science, to implement general forensic science standards. The aim of article is to examine the problems of criminalists' international cooperation. Lithuanian criminalists joined the process of guidelines implementation for the project of creation of European forensic science area and development of forensic science infrastructure in Europe. Researches of Mykolas Romeris University (MRU) are carrying out the related research since 2005. The article analyses the problems of work organization in expert institutions by analysing the possibility for Lithuania to join the common European forensic science area. The research results show that such work should be coordinated by specific legal acts. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Information; Criminology; Justice

PL

Informacja; Kryminalistyka; Sprawiedliwość

• Czasopismo: Journal of International Studies
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: 9
• Numer: nr 3
• Strony: 241--254

Twórcy

autor

Eglė Bilevičiūtė

• Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius, Lithuania

autor

Romualdas Drakšas

• Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius, Lithuania

autor

Vidmantas Egidijus Kurapka

• Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius, Lithuania

autor

Matulienė Snieguolė

• Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius, Lithuania

Bibliografia

• Bilevičiūtė, E., Kurapka, V. E., Matulienė, S., Stankevičiūtė, S. (2014), The conception of implementation of vision for European forensic science 2020 in Lithuania, International journal of social, management, economics and business engineering, 8(6), pp. 1790-1798.
• Butler, J. M. (2015), U.S. initiatives to strengthen forensic science & international standards in forensic DNA, Forensic Science International: Genetics, 18, pp. 4-20.
• Commission of the European Communities (2008), Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee. Towards a European e-Justice Strategy, C0M(2008)329 final // http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/docs/com_2008_329_en.pdf (referred on 10/03/2016).
• Council Framework Decision 2009/905/JHA of 30 November 2009 on Accreditation of forensic service providers carrying out laboratory activities (2009), Official Journal of the European Union L 322, 9.12.2009, pp. 14 - 16.
• Council of the European Union (2011), Draft Council conclusions on the vision for European Forensic Science 2020 including the creation of a European Forensic Science Area and the development of forensic science infrastructure in Europe, Council document 17537/11 of 2011-12-01 // http://db.eurocrim.org/db/en/vorgang/286/ (referred on 10/03/2016).
• Final Report - Study an Obstacles to Cooperation and Information - sharing among Forensic Science Laboratories and other Relevant Bodies of Different Member States and between these and Counterparts in Third Countries Contract JLS/ Dl/2007/025 (2007), // http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/doc_centre/police/docs/study_08_12_en.pdf (referred on 10/03/2016).
• Gabel, J. D. (2014), Realizing reliability in forensic science from the ground up, The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, no. 104(2), pp. 283-352.
• Harvey, R (2009), The Independence of the Prosecutor: A Police Perspective, Australian Institute of Criminology // http:// libguides.navitas.com/c.php?g=285020&p=1898602 (referred on 10/03/2016).
• Juodkaitė-Granskienė, G.; Malevski, H.; Merkevičius, R. (2011), Teismo ekspertizės reglamentavimas - būklė ir perspektyvos, Kriminalistika ir teismo ekspertizė: mokslas, studijos, praktika. Vilnius: Lietuvos teismo ekspertizės centras.
• Koehler, J. (2010), Forensic science reform in the 21st century: a major conference, a blockbuster report and reasons to be pessimistic, Law, Probability & Risk, no. 9(1), pp. 1-6.
• Kurapka, E.V., Malevski, H., Kazemikaitiene, E. (2007), Kriminalistikos ir teismo ekspertizes ziniq poreikio ir jq tai-kymo praktikos Lietuvoje vertinimas, Jurisprudencija: MRU mokslo darbai, no. 12(102), pp. 22-31.
• Kurapka, E. V., BileviciUte, E., Matuliene, S., JuskeviciUte, J., Dereskevicius, E., Kurapka, K. (2012), Specialiq ziniq taikymo tiriant nusikaltimus moksline koncepcija ir jos ¡gyvendinimo mechanizmas: mokslo studija, Vilnius.
• Laurin, J. E. (2013), Remapping the Path Forward: Toward a Systemic View of Forensic Science Reform and Oversight (September 22, 2012)", Texas Law Review, U of Texas Law, Public Law Research Paper, no. 246 // http://ssrn.com/ abstract=2150694 (referred on 10/03/2016).
• Luif, P. (2010), The External Effects of the Prüm Treaty: How Cooperation in Internal Security Affects EU-US Relations, Conference Papers -- International Studies Association. Annual Meeting, pp. 1- 18.
• Malkoc, E., Neuteboom, W. (2007), The current status of forensic science laboratory accreditation in Europe, Forensic Science International, 167(2/3), pp. 121-126.
• National Research Council. Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward (2009), Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
• Nusikalstamumo grėsmės ir žmogaus saugumas. Monografi ja (2010), Vilnius.
• O'Neill, M. A. (2011), Europe that protects: moving to the next stage of cross-border law enforcement cooperation, The Police Journal, no. 84, pp. 125-150.
• Pardo, M. S. (2010), Evidence Theory and the NAS Report on Forensic Science. Utah Law Review, no. 2, pp. 367-383.
• Prainsack, B., Toom, V. (2010), The Prüm Regime: Situated Dis/Empowerment in Transnational DNA Profile Exchange, British Journal of Criminology, 50(6), pp. 1117-1135.
• Prainsack, B., Toom, V. (2013), Performing the Union: The Prüm Decision and the European dream, Studies in History & Philosophy of Biological & Biomedical Sciences, 44(1), pp. 71-79.
• Widener, A. (2012), Still Seeking Forensic Reform, Chemical & Engineering News, 90(26), pp. 32-34.
• Wilson, T. J., Stockdale, M. W., Gallop A. M. C., Lawler B. (2014), Regularising the Regulator: the Government's Consultation about Placing the Forensic Science Regulator on a Statutory Footing, The Journal of Criminal Law, 78, pp. 136-163.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14254/2071-8330.2016/9-3/19