Models of Supervisory Review in Criminal Procedure in the World

Abstract

In adjudication, no matter how rigorously procedural law is designed, wrongful or erroneous judgments of the courts can hardly be avoided. Criminal procedure laws around the world therefore provide mechanisms for higher courts to review the judgments and decisions of lower courts, while recognising the right to appeal as a fundamental human right. To safeguard the finality of judgments and the stability of legal relations, however, the review of legally effective judgments and decisions is permitted only as an extraordinary procedure. In Vietnamese criminal procedure, the procedure for remedying judicial errors in legally effective judgments and decisions is “giám đốc thẩm” (supervisory review). Drawing on common theoretical foundations and distinguishing criteria, the article analyses and compares four typical models of supervisory review in the world - the cassation model, the revision model, the appeal model, and the socialist model of judicial supervision - thereby identifying the position of the Vietnamese model. The article also outlines current trends in reforming supervisory review procedures worldwide and offers several recommendations for improving this institution in Vietnam.