COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE NIGGAHAKAMMA PROCESS ACCORDING TO THE SUPREME SANGHA COUNCIL RULE NUMBER 11 (B.E. 2521) WITH THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE: A CASE STUDY OF PRELIMINARY HEARING APPROACH

Abstract

The objectives of this article were: 1. To study the comparative analysis of the process of filing an estate under the Sangha Sangha Council No. 11 and the Criminal Procedure Code. 2. To study the method of investigating the cause of lawsuits according to the settlement process according to the Sangha Sangha Council No. 11 (B.E.2505). The study and research documents collecting data from various academic papers; descriptive data analysis methods; and descriptive descriptions consistent with the objectives.

The results showed that: 1. A comparative analysis of the NIGGAHAKAMMA process of filing an estate under the Sangha Council No. 11 and the Criminal Procedure Code is that any criminal prosecution in court must have the plaintiff as a party. The parties who have the power to bring a criminal case to the court because the actions in criminal cases are affecting the peace and order of the country. The injured person has the right to file a criminal prosecution by himself/herself. 2. Methods for investigating cause of action according to the BE 2521 compared to the method of inquiry on causation under the Criminal Procedure Code. the lawsuit has been filed Let the court handle the following orders: 1) the case of the people as a plaintiff to investigate the prosecution but if that case, the public prosecutor indicted the defendant on the same charge to be dealt with in accordance with subsection (2) 2) the case of the public prosecutor as a plaintiff No prosecution is required. but if it is deemed appropriate, he may order a preliminary inquiry.