Substantial consideration and in-person confrontation of requests under Article 477 are on the agenda of the Supreme Court.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court emphasized the substantive examination and in-person confrontation with prior appointment of requests under Article 477 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

According to the Supreme Court Public Relations Office, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said at a meeting of the Council of Deputies on June 25, 2021:

The handling of cases under Article 477 of the Criminal Procedure Code is substantive and must be conducted at the discretion of the judges, while creating a suitable place for the parties to meet in person, and by setting a time in advance.

Creating unity of judicial procedure in the form of two conflicting opinions is only one example of unity of procedure, while unity of procedure has a more general meaning to prevent the dispersion of opinions, so legal ambiguities, examples, and solutions in this regard must be identified.

The existing problems and shortcomings have been identified and quantified by the judges of the Supreme Court with regard to the courts of first instance and appeals, and God willing, these issues will be announced at a national conference with the chief justices and solutions will be found in this regard.

477 cases must be handled at the discretion of the judges, with the presence of the parties and file members, and by prior appointment.

Regarding Article 477 cases, he noted: "Most often, the handling of Article 477 cases is subjective and should be conducted, at the discretion of the judges, in the presence of the parties and participants in the case and by setting a prior time. In this regard, a suitable location and necessary facilities should be considered for holding trial sessions for Article 477 cases of the Code of Criminal Procedure."

It is worth mentioning: In this meeting, the final coordination and summary of how to hold the first nationwide conference of chief justices across the country, coordination of the program of specialized working groups, the monitoring working group, the working group for creating unity of judicial procedure, the working group for examining the damages and challenges of the investigation process, the media annex of the conference and the presence of invited guests, and the creation of a network for electronic communication with chief justices were all necessary plans.

Source: Supreme Court Public Relations