La Litis contestatio en el proceso penal canónico

One of the principal elements of the trial is the act by which the judge, after hearing the parties and weighing the libellus, determines the terms of the controversy (the litis contestatio). Canonical tradition suggests that this moment can be reconfigured in a penal trial in terms of the delicti contestatio, since it involves a bearing witness before the judge of the public notitia criminis and opposition to it or at least the acknowledgment of being the one accused of it. This moment marks the institution of the contradictorium in the penal process and constitutes the basis for procedural self-defense. Judicial praxis deems it sufficient for the formula of the doubt to indicate the alleged delict together with a commonly indeterminate penalty, except in the case of most serious penalties. However, natural justice and the rationality of the judicial process seem to suggest that the formula of the doubt be endowed with greater specificity of the threatened penalty. This could even have implications for a more just administrative penal process.Uno de los elementos principales del proceso es el acto por el que el juez, tras haber oído a las partes y valorado el libellus, determina los términos de la controversia (la litis contestatio). La tradición canónica sugiere que, en el juicio penal, este momento puede reconfigurarse como delicti contestatio, puesto que supone poner en conocimiento del juez la notitia criminis y su oposición, o al menos el reconocimiento de ser el acusado. Este momento señala la iniciación del contradictorium en el proceso penal y constituye la base de la defensa propia en el proceso. La praxis judicial considera suficiente, para la fórmula de la duda, que se indique el delito que se le imputa junto a la pena que le corresponde que, por lo común, queda indeterminada, excepto en el caso de las penas más graves. Sin embargo, la justicia natural y la racionalidad del proceso parecen sugerir que, en la fórmula de la duda, debería delimitarse más concretamente la pena. Este proceder podría dar lugar también a un procedimiento administrativo penal más justo

La normalización del proceso penal extrajudicial (c. 1720). Análisis, crítica, propuestas

A plain reading of c. 1342 § 1, albeit in its implicit sense, reveals that the judicial process is the ordinary instrument for handling a penal cause, while an extrajudicial or administrative penal process may only be employed when just causes impede a judicial process. Nevertheless, because the formulation of that canon is a result of a compromise in the Code Commission, and also because of the rarity of penal trials in the decades following the promulgation of the CIC, canonical doctrine has yielded much discretion to the Ordinary in selecting the form of penal process, such that the extrajudicial process has come to be considered the “normal” pathway. In any case, it is critical that the judicial nature of the decision concluding the extrajudicial process be born carefully in mind. Moreover, ongoing profound reflection is to be devoted to considering how the extrajudicial process can be a truly just one. It may be optimal for a single penal process to be proposed to the Legislator de iure condendo.Una simple lectura del c. 1342 § 1, al margen de su sentido implícito, revela que el proceso judicial es el instrumento ordinario para la tramitación de causas penales, mientras que el proceso penal extrajudicial o administrativo sólo se puede emplear cuando se dan causas justas que impiden el proceso judicial. Sin embargo, puesto que la formulación de este canon es el resultado de un acuerdo en la Comisión Codicial, y dado que los juicios penales fueron más bien infrecuentes en las décadas posteriores a la promulgación del CIC, la doctrina canónica le ha otorgado gran discreción al Ordinario para elegir el modo del proceso penal, hasta el punto de que el proceso extrajudicial ha venido a considerarse como la vía “normal”. En cualquier caso, resulta esencial que se tenga presente con la debida prudencia la naturaleza jurídica de la decisión que concluye el proceso extrajudicial. Además, en la actualidad, hace falta una reflexión profunda para considerar de qué modo puede el proceso extrajudicial ser verdaderamente justo. Quizás lo ideal sería proponer un proceso penal único al legislador de iure condendo

CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition

This book lays out the scientific goals to be addressed by the next-generation ground-based cosmic microwave background experiment, CMB-S4, envisioned to consist of dedicated telescopes at the South Pole, the high Chilean Atacama plateau and possibly a northern hemisphere site, all equipped with new superconducting cameras. CMB-S4 will dramatically advance cosmological studies by crossing critical thresholds in the search for the B-mode polarization signature of primordial gravitational waves, in the determination of the number and masses of the neutrinos, in the search for evidence of new light relics, in constraining the nature of dark energy, and in testing general relativity on large scales

La normalización del proceso penal extrajudicial (c. 1720). Análisis, crítica, propuestas

A plain reading of c. 1342 § 1, albeit in its implicit sense, reveals that the judicial process is the ordinary instrument for handling a penal cause, while an extrajudicial or administrative penal process may only be employed when just causes impede a judicial process. Nevertheless, because the formulation of that canon is a result of a compromise in the Code Commission, and also because of the rarity of penal trials in the decades following the promulgation of the CIC, canonical doctrine has yielded much discretion to the Ordinary in selecting the form of penal process, such that the extrajudicial process has come to be considered the “normal” pathway. In any case, it is critical that the judicial nature of the decision concluding the extrajudicial process be born carefully in mind. Moreover, ongoing profound reflection is to be devoted to considering how the extrajudicial process can be a truly just one. It may be optimal for a single penal process to be proposed to the Legislator de iure condendo.Una simple lectura del c. 1342 § 1, al margen de su sentido implícito, revela que el proceso judicial es el instrumento ordinario para la tramitación de causas penales, mientras que el proceso penal extrajudicial o administrativo sólo se puede emplear cuando se dan causas justas que impiden el proceso judicial. Sin embargo, puesto que la formulación de este canon es el resultado de un acuerdo en la Comisión Codicial, y dado que los juicios penales fueron más bien infrecuentes en las décadas posteriores a la promulgación del CIC, la doctrina canónica le ha otorgado gran discreción al Ordinario para elegir el modo del proceso penal, hasta el punto de que el proceso extrajudicial ha venido a considerarse como la vía “normal”. En cualquier caso, resulta esencial que se tenga presente con la debida prudencia la naturaleza jurídica de la decisión que concluye el proceso extrajudicial. Además, en la actualidad, hace falta una reflexión profunda para considerar de qué modo puede el proceso extrajudicial ser verdaderamente justo. Quizás lo ideal sería proponer un proceso penal único al legislador de iure condendo

La Litis contestatio en el proceso penal canónico

One of the principal elements of the trial is the act by which the judge, after hearing the parties and weighing the libellus, determines the terms of the controversy (the litis contestatio). Canonical tradition suggests that this moment can be reconfigured in a penal trial in terms of the delicti contestatio, since it involves a bearing witness before the judge of the public notitia criminis and opposition to it or at least the acknowledgment of being the one accused of it. This moment marks the institution of the contradictorium in the penal process and constitutes the basis for procedural self-defense. Judicial praxis deems it sufficient for the formula of the doubt to indicate the alleged delict together with a commonly indeterminate penalty, except in the case of most serious penalties. However, natural justice and the rationality of the judicial process seem to suggest that the formula of the doubt be endowed with greater specificity of the threatened penalty. This could even have implications for a more just administrative penal process.Uno de los elementos principales del proceso es el acto por el que el juez, tras haber oído a las partes y valorado el libellus, determina los términos de la controversia (la litis contestatio). La tradición canónica sugiere que, en el juicio penal, este momento puede reconfigurarse como delicti contestatio, puesto que supone poner en conocimiento del juez la notitia criminis y su oposición, o al menos el reconocimiento de ser el acusado. Este momento señala la iniciación del contradictorium en el proceso penal y constituye la base de la defensa propia en el proceso. La praxis judicial considera suficiente, para la fórmula de la duda, que se indique el delito que se le imputa junto a la pena que le corresponde que, por lo común, queda indeterminada, excepto en el caso de las penas más graves. Sin embargo, la justicia natural y la racionalidad del proceso parecen sugerir que, en la fórmula de la duda, debería delimitarse más concretamente la pena. Este proceder podría dar lugar también a un procedimiento administrativo penal más justo

Inflation: Theory and Observations

International audienceCosmic inflation provides a window to the highest energy densities accessible in nature, far beyond those achievable in any realistic terrestrial experiment. Theoretical insights into the inflationary era and its observational probes may therefore shed unique light on the physical laws underlying our universe. This white paper describes our current theoretical understanding of the inflationary era, with a focus on the statistical properties of primordial fluctuations. In particular, we survey observational targets for three important signatures of inflation: primordial gravitational waves, primordial non-Gaussianity and primordial features. With the requisite advancements in analysis techniques, the tremendous increase in the raw sensitivities of upcoming and planned surveys will translate to leaps in our understanding of the inflationary paradigm and could open new frontiers for cosmology and particle physics. The combination of future theoretical and observational developments therefore offer the potential for a dramatic discovery about the nature of cosmic acceleration in the very early universe and physics on the smallest scales

Database-driven models of the world's Large Marine Ecosystems

We present a new methodology for database-driven ecosystem model generation and apply the methodology to the world's 66 currently defined Large Marine Ecosystems. The method relies on a large number of spatial and temporal databases, including FishBase, SeaLifeBase, as well as several other databases developed notably as part of the Sea Around Us project. The models are formulated using the freely available Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) modeling approach and software. We tune the models by fitting to available time series data, but recognize that the models represent only a first-generation of database-driven ecosystem models. We use the models to obtain a first estimate of fish biomass in the world's LMEs. The biggest hurdles at present to further model development and validation are insufficient time series trend information, and data on spatial fishing effort

Snowmass Theory Frontier: Astrophysics and Cosmology

International audienceWe summarize progress made in theoretical astrophysics and cosmology over the past decade and areas of interest for the coming decade. This Report is prepared as the TF09 "Astrophysics and Cosmology" topical group summary for the Theory Frontier as part of the Snowmass 2021 process