ПРОЦЕДУРА APAGOGE АТИНСКОГ КРИВИЧНОГ ПРАВА У СЛУЧАЈЕВИМА УБИСТВА
ТHE PROCEDURE APAGOGE OF ATHENIAN CRIMINAL LAW IN HOMICIDE CASES

Summary/Abstract: The aim of this paper is to investigate the authenticity of flexibility within Athenian court proceedings for the criminal acts of homicide from the second part of the fifth century until the early years in the restored democracy of 403. B.C, with particular reference to cases of homicide in relation to the procedure of apagoge. The traditional homicide procedure, dike phonou, of Athenian homicide law was a cumbersome and ritualistic remedy with which the Athenians tried to clean up the polis infected by the presence of killers (mίasma). Those who prosecuted by the traditional dikai found themselves at a serious disadvantage in some respects. In such circumstances, the plantif sometimes invoked the ancient procedure apagoge. Taken strictly, apagoge was the interrogation before the competent magistrate of one taken in flagrante delicto committing certain acts or that it acts was committed by a robber (kakouryos). The magistrate was usually one of the Eleven. If a man so caught confessed, the magistrate administered at once the appropriate penalty because it was obvious that he was guilty (ep'autophoroi). If he did not, his accuser had to present to the magistrate a written indictment, on the basis of which the magistrate introduced the issue for trial. The two cases, against Euxitheus and against Agoratus, testify to implement procedures apagoge. Those cases were not resolved by self-help or summary execution by the Eleven, as might have been done in an earlier era. This was perhaps the most important procedural implication of the phrase “obviously guilty”, that parties to the agreement refrain from settling grievances by acts of retribution that were traditionally justifiable.

• Details
• Contents