No according to me the parole system should not be abolished but it should be more strict and done in more specific platforms cases.
Explanation:
According to my opinion, the parole should not be abolished but it should be categorized for some specific cases. The court system needs to define or create a category in which some specific or certain cases fall.
On the basis of nature of case, the court need to grant parole such as in theft cases while in cases like murder, attempt to murder, kidnapping which are more dangerous in nature, should not grant parole.
Thus specification is a required amendment rather than abolishing.
Answer:
Imprisonment is not the only way to rehabilitate a person who violated the law, since there are alternative penalties to prison, such as fines, bonds, jobs and collaborations in non-profit social entities and victim reparation systems. In all these cases, the defendant receives a penalty, but this is not the prison but an alternative to it, which still puts him at a disadvantage compared to the rest of society as a result of his non-compliance of the law, but due to the low severity of the crime, the defendant does not deserve a prison sentence.
Answer:
Provincial and municipal courts are both trial courts and appellate courts, while district courts are trial courts. There are military tribunals established at various levels in the Vietnam People's Army, the highest one being the Central Military Tribunal, which is subordinate to the Supreme People's Court.
Answer:
Thank you so much Back at you!
Explanation:
Answer:
IF IS ALREADY FILLED WHY YOU POST ON BRAINLY
Explanation:
