AN ANALYTICAL STUDY OF THE PROCESS OF INDUSTRIAL ESTATE REGISTRATION ACCORDING TO THE SANGHA SUPREME COUNCIL NO. 11, ARTICLE 29 AND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE CASE STUDY: THE TRIAL BEHIND THE DEFENDANT'S BACK

Abstract

In this research, four objectives were purposely made: 1) to study the trial of the Sangha’s cases according to the supreme Sangha council’s regulation of the 11^th version, article of 29 concerning with the trial and judgement on suppression  and trial according to the code of criminal procedures in the case the Sangha’s orders are criminal wrong too, 2) to study the trial behind the defendants both in the supreme Sangha council’s regulation of the 11^th version, article of 29 concerning with the trial and judgement on suppression  and related law, 3) to study the foreign laws concerning with the trial on religious order cases, and 4) to improve the trial of Sangha’s orders according to the regulation of suppression where the trial behind the defendants could be made appropriately and fairly. It is believed that Buddhist monks are the religious persons generally regarded as the followers who are supposed to sustain Buddhism and then they hold certain high position being deserved to be properly respected in order follow the Order as the good role models for general people. In this respect, if Buddhist monks committed certain offence and then escaped, they deserve to be punished as per the wrongdoing being committed in order to protect Buddhism together with the order and morality of society. The research findings showed that the problem caused by the application of the supreme Sangha council’s regulations should be revised or the additional suppression should be given to the article 29 as follows: 1) The measures to protect the defendants in the case they lack intention to escape but could not attend the process of such a trial as the offence is not caused by themselves should be given in order to protect the rights of the accused ones by providing the exception to the article 29 that ‘in the case the defendant brings in certain witnesses and evidences it is proved that he has no intention to escape in the day of judgement and then the committee in judging the offence done by the defendant should be set up “when the returning of defendant is present”. 2) From the prescribed article, in the exception according to the supreme Sangha council’s regulations, 11^th version, the article 29 (1) concerning with the trial and judgement of suppression, a researcher is of the view that  although such an exception only means the trial and judging suppression behind the defendant, yet it determines to put such an exception into the hands of the judicial committee’s consideration  as it prescribes that “the first judicial committee is entitled to examine further as they see fit”, in this case a researcher is of the view that in examining such a case the judicial committee may be allowed to exercise different scrutiny which would allow the judgement of the case behind or in front of the defendant despite non-examination of most of cases is done; it is principally done in front of the defendant. Consequently, such processes in dealing with Sangha’s trial of cases remain delayed and thereby giving rise to bad result to the image of verdict delivered to Buddhist monks who have committed certain offence. Therefore, it is recommended by a researcher that “it should be cut off”.