Abstract
The paper examines appeals against precautionary measures from the specific standpoint of the balance between promptness and right to defence for suspect and accused. For this purpose, three recent judgments of the Joint Chambers of the Court of Cassation are analyzed: the oscillating solutions adopted by the Supreme Court would require an authentic legislative interpretation.
Keywords
appeals against precautionary measures; promptness; right to defence for suspect and accused; victim’s absence; recent judgments of the Joint Chambers of the Court of Cassation