As you may have guessed from its similar spelling, the word retained comes from the verb to hold, which in turn comes from the Latin word restringere, which means “to withdraw, to imprison, to examine.” When talking about an object, restraint is a device used to maintain control over something. For example, if your leg is undergoing surgery, doctors will use a chain to keep it still. It is not easy to exercise restraint in the creation of criminal law; Nor is it without controversy because, as already mentioned, the importance and value of restraint in a given context is often the subject of reasonable political disagreement. In addition to this element of controversy, however, two notable factors influence the extent to which restraint can be observed in a particular state. First, just as coercion is often not easy for an insecure person, restraint in the application of the criminal law cannot come easily for a society that is collectively dangerous in its public institutions and the integrity of its public officials. A related concern is that the restriction in the creation of criminal law is unlikely to prevail, either among those who believe that positive law can actually achieve or cause the result for which it was created, or more generally among those who believe that the law can actually resolve deep political or social disagreements. Respect for coercion presupposes a certain understanding that the law, in particular criminal law, has only limited value as an effective means of social order. Finally, the non-interested observer could also take note of companies in which the formal expression of an obligation of constraint and proportionality is more or less applied in the practice of the legislator and the courts when these bodies act in their respective areas of competence. What the observer would notice is that a society`s formal commitment to such ideals is in itself little more than the declaration of a promise, and that the actual fulfillment or fulfillment of that promise is an entirely different matter. A commitment to restraint and proportionality is not a commitment to the absolute, but to a moderate use of power. In practice, legislators and courts are forced to consider whether the values of deference and proportionality expressed in a company`s laws set too high a standard of compliance. They might respond that the need requires an exception or that the formal rules need to be changed to reflect a different view of deference and proportionality.

In any society, however, there is no doubt that the resolute pursuit of restraint and proportionality by law is always a struggle to ensure the primacy of principles over expediency. These are words that are often used in combination with restraint. The Constitution of Ukraine contains articles that recognize and guarantee the main concepts associated with the rule of law with regard to the administration of criminal justice. First and foremost, and by no means limited to criminal cases, is the separation of judicial power from all other state institutions. It is clear that the rule of law cannot be meaningfully respected if the judiciary at all levels is not completely independent of the control or influence of any other governmental body. The two quoted passages from Professor Gilmore`s lectures on The Ages of American Law deserve careful consideration. At a time in history when many nations have made a fresh start by reconstituting themselves, the men and women of a reasonably just society will seize the opportunity to enact reasonably just legislation. What this law is cannot be defined prescriptively, but the thrust of this text is that restraint is a public virtue that must be observed in its creation. Undoubtedly, the men and women who participate in this company understand its unique and privileged position.

Restraint will be their beacon and, luckily, it will be their legacy. Restraint is the act of withholding something. For example, if you exercise restraint about your emotions, you won`t burst into tears in public. Restriction, shortening or restriction. prohibition of the law; Hold or push the action. Obstruction, restriction or restriction of liberty. “So what is generally meant by the term `restraint`? Does this mean that the limitation, limitation or limitation must be imposed by those in possession of the person or thing that is limited, restricted or limited, or is the concept fulfilled by a restriction created by the use of external force? For example, if a city is besieged and the inhabitants are imprisoned within its walls by the besieging army when they try to get out, are pushed back, would it be wrong to say that they are held captive within these borders? The Court considers that this would not be the case; And if not, it can be said with the same decency, when a port is blocked, that the ships inside are blocked or prevented from leaving. The blocking force is not in possession of the ships booby-trapped in the port, but acts on them and holds them. It is a major screw that is applied directly and effectively to them, preventing them from leaving the port. This appears to the court, in correct language, as “a limitation” by the power imposing the blockade; And when a ship trying to get out is boarded and turned back, that restraining force is practically applied to that ship. Olivera v. Union Ins.

Co. 3 wheat. 1S9, 4 L. Edition 305. The terms “coercion” and “imprisonment of princes” used in marine insurance policies have the same meaning. There is no need to examine this example in more detail, nor is it necessary to attempt a general statement of principles that would provide a solution to this and other similar problems. In the present case, it is sufficient to note that, although the principle of non-retroactivity is largely unchallenged, there are many ordinary cases of statutory interpretation in which it may have great practical significance. If the legislature has respected the Constitution by giving the impression that it creates only contemplated criminal offences, it would be incompatible with the principle of legality for the courts to interpret these offences in a way that creates a network of liability that goes far beyond that defined by the legislature. While courts are routinely required to interpret ambiguities in legal language, their legitimate power to do so does not include retroactively redefining offences. Restraint is generally considered a personal virtue. It is associated with other values, including tolerance, patience, tolerance, self-discipline and sacrifice. Its antithesis is found among faults or vices, including recklessness, anger, intolerance, temptation, self-interest, domination and unjustified violence.

There is no single way to define the personal virtue of restraint, but any presentation of one`s practice in civil society must include respect for the integrity of others and respect for their well-being. It involves the ability to control one`s impulses and subordinate one`s personal willingness to accommodate others. The principle of legality is perhaps the most striking expression of the rule of law when it comes to intra-State criminal cases. There are countless others. The way in which the Constitution and other legal forms seek to control police powers and protect liberty and privacy from state interference can generally be seen as an expression of the rule of law. The rule of law is also evident in adjectival law on matters of procedure and evidence, sometimes amorphously referred to as due process law, and in substantive criminal law. One is the degree of fault that should be included in the definition of culpable conduct. For example, in a case of alleged theft, it would be incompatible with any notion of coercion to incur liability solely on the basis of evidence that the defendant was found in possession of property that did not belong to him. Similarly, cases of bodily harm or death require proof of fault commensurate with the perceived seriousness of the crime.

Various passages of the Constitution of Ukraine also contain aspects of what is referred to in many legal systems as the principle of legality. This term may seem synonymous with the rule of law, but more specifically refers to three related ideas. These ideas are united by the principle that the power of the State to invoke criminal law can only be legitimate if it is expressed in laws that have prospective effect, are expressed with sufficient precision to inform the citizen of its content and those who are responsible for its administration and enforcement. Do not allow excessive discretion.