scholarly journals Standards for ensuring the legality of implementing unspount activities in criminal process through the prism of legal positions of the European court of human rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 111-123
Author(s):  
A. Tumanyants ◽  
I. Krytska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Democratic Society ◽  
Order Conditions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Covert Activity

The analysis of the legal positions of the ECHR in the aspect of the subject of the article under consideration made it possible to conditionally single out the following standards for ensuring the legality of the implementation of covert activity in criminal proceedings:- predictability. Its essence lies in the fact that the grounds, procedural order, conditions, timing, the circle of persons and crimes in relation to which it is allowed to carry out covert activities should be as detailed, clear and accurate as possible in the criminal procedural legislation. Moreover, any person had the opportunity to familiarize himself with the relevant regulatory prescriptions and foresee the actions that can be carried out in relation to him;- warranty against abuse. The content of this standard can be disclosed by more detailed highlighting of clarifying provisions ("substandards"). These include: control of interference in human rights and freedoms; the certainty of the circle of persons in relation to whom it is possible to carry out secret activities; limited corpus delicti, for the purpose of investigation or prevention of which covert activity is allowed;; the existence in national legislation of procedures that facilitate the law of the implementation of covert activity in criminal proceedings; the temporary nature of the implementation of secret activities in the criminal process;- verifiability. The essence of this standard can be disclosed through the establishment of judicial control over the decision of the issue regarding the possible destruction of information obtained in the course of conducting covert activities, which is not relevant to criminal proceedings, as well as the requirement for the mandatory opening of decisions that were the basis for conducting covert investigative actions;- exclusivity. The main content of this standard is that covert activity in criminal proceedings can be carried out only in cases where the disclosure or prevention of a crime in another way is impossible or is too complicated;- proportionality of the intervention and its expediency. The essence of this standard is that the implementation of certain covert coercive actions that are associated with the restriction of human rights and freedoms must be proportionate to the goals for which such actions are directed. Moreover, these goals and the applied coercion must be necessary in a democratic society;- inadmissibility of tacit interference in the communication of some subjects. First of all, this requirement concerns the need to legislatively guarantee non-interference in communication between a lawyer and his client, a priest and an accused, etc., which means a ban on targeted control over the communication of certain subjects, as well as the obligation to destroy information obtained in the course of an accidental, situational interfering with their communication.

scholarly journals Judicial control over investigative (search) actions that require prior permission

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (28) ◽  
pp. 151-158
Author(s):  
Vasyl Nastyuk ◽  
Oleksandr Mikhailov ◽  
Ekaterina Izbash ◽  
Vitalii Kondratenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Theoretical Concepts ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
European Court ◽  
Clear Delineation ◽  
Prior Permission

The purpose of the article is to investigate the peculiarities of judicial control during investigative (search) actions that require prior permission on the basis of the analysis of legislation and modern theoretical concepts of the science of criminal process. Special research methods were also used in the work, in particular, comparative legal; special legal, logical-legal and systematic. The article is devoted to specific issues of judicial control, which, in accordance with the current legislation of Ukraine, is carried out when granting permission for investigative (search) actions that require it. The investigative (search) actions that require the prior permission of the investigating judge are identified. The norms of the international and national legislation are analyzed, which enshrines guarantees from illegal entry into the dwelling or other property of a person and carrying out of procedural actions there. Attention is drawn to the need for a clear delineation of investigative (search) actions, such as inspection and house search or other property of a person, since their substitution will lead to the court finding the evidence inadmissible. The position of the European Court of Human Rights on the criteria for the lawfulness of the search is outlined. Emphasis is placed on the specifics of conducting a house search or other property of a lawyer. It is concluded that the effective provision by the investigating judge of the rights, freedoms and interests of persons whose housing or other property is planned to be searched is a necessary condition for the realization of the principles of criminal proceedings.

Admissibility of Evidence Obtained by Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment. Does the European Court of Human Rights Offer a Coherent and Convincing Approach?

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-153
Author(s):  
Wojciech Jasiński
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
European Court ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Main Shortcoming

Abstract The paper presents and assesses the approach of the ECtHR to admissibility of evidence obtained through torture and inhuman or degrading treatment in the criminal process. The author examines the content of the standard, its justifications and the consistency of the ECtHR's reasoning. The paper refers both to the admissibility of statements and real evidence as well as to primary and derivate evidence obtained in violation of Article 3 echr. The admissibility of evidence obtained by oppressive conduct of private individuals is also analysed. The assessment of the Strasbourg Court’s case law indicates that its approach is quite nuanced and, unfortunately, inconsistent and incoherent. Its main shortcoming is the lack of an in-depth analysis of the rationale for the inadmissibility of evidence obtained by maltreatment and the piecemeal treatment of individual categories of such evidence devoid of attempt to comprehensively address its admissibility in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Restrictions of individual’s rights, freedoms and legal interests within temporary access to items and documents: practical aspects.

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-284
Author(s):  
Andriy Melnychenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Informed Decisions ◽  
Legitimate Interests

Temporary access to things and a document as an institution that restricts human rights and freedoms in criminal proceedings and its main properties have been studied. Attention is drawn to the problem of numerous risks of human rights violations during the application of temporary access to things and documents due to unfounded and weak argumentation of investigators' requests for temporary access, as well as a superficial assessment of circumstances by the investigating judge due to overload of requests. Statistical data have been studied, which indicate the need for consistent reform of judicial control in the direction of studying the materials and making informed decisions. Temporary access to things and documents in the criminal process is part of the institution of measures to ensure criminal proceedings. It attracts the attention of scholars because it has a rather complicated procedure for obtaining a decision on temporary access to things and documents, which must be provided by the investigating judge based on the results of the petition. The mechanism of judicial control indicates that this measure to some extent restricts the rights, freedoms or legitimate interests of a person – a participant in criminal proceedings or a third party. Related to this is the problem of the measure under investigation, which is the risk of violation of the rights of individuals, because every year the investigating judges receive a large number of requests for temporary access, and there are specific features in terms of providing temporary access to things and documents containing legally protected secret.

The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Process

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
European Court

This handbook examines various aspects of the criminal process, including the role of prosecutors in common law and civil law jurisdictions, the rights and duties of experts, victim rights in civil law jurisdictions, surveillance and investigation, criminal prosecution and its alternatives, evidence discovery and disclosure in common law systems, evidence law as forensic science, common law plea bargaining, appeals and post-conviction review, and procedure in international tribunals. The book is organized into eight parts covering topics ranging from criminal process in the dual penal state to interrogation law and practice in common law jurisdictions, empirical and comparative approaches to criminal procedure, prosecution-led investigations and measures of procedural coercion in the field of corruption, international corporate prosecutions, special procedures for white-collar and corporate wrongdoing in Europe, and trial procedure in response to terrorism. Also discussed are the roles of the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights as guardians of fair criminal proceedings in Europe, double jeopardy or ne bis in idem in common law and civil law jurisdictions, plea bargaining vs. abbreviated trial procedures, restorative justice as an alternative to penal sanctions, and the pluralistic nature of international criminal procedure.

ANONIMNI SVEDOCI I ZAŠTITA LjUDSKIH PRAVA

2021 ◽  
pp. 277-296
Author(s):  
Veljko Turanjanin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Step Test ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Insufficient Knowledge

Тhe author deals with the problem of anonymous witnesses in the context of the right to a fair trial in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. One of the problems in the application of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is related to the testimonies of anonymous witnesses in criminal proceedings. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights has developed certain criteria that must be followed in national legislation, but it is obvious that there is insufficient knowledge regarding this problem, as well as the reluctance to apply the mentioned rules. The standards developed by the ECtHR are very important for national laws and jurisprudence. The author explains the development of a three-step test that needs to be examined when assessing a violation of the right to a fair trial, through an analysis of a multitude of judgments, in order to provide guidance on the application of Article 6 § 3 (d) of the European Convention on Human Rights. After introductory considerations, the author explains who can be a witness under the Convention, since this question is raised independently of national legislation, and then explains the right to examine witnesses, the admissibility of testimonies by anonymous witnesses and the examination of the three-stage test, and gives concluding remarks.

scholarly journals Reasonable Time in Criminal Proceedings of Ukraine in the Context of the European Court of Human Rights Case Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 701-715
Author(s):  
Bohdan Derdiuk ◽  
Serhii Kovalchuk ◽  
Snizhana Koropetska ◽  
Vasyl Savchenko ◽  
Oleksandra Smushak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Practical Implication ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
European Court ◽  
Time Period ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

The purpose of the paper is an analysis of the notion of reasonable time, period which is taken into account in their calculation and criteria for determining a reasonable time for criminal proceedings in Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation in the context of the European Court of Human Rights case law. The subject of the study is an analysis of Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation from the point of view of its conformity to the ECHR’s case law in the designation of a reasonable time, period which is taken into account in calculation of a reasonable time and criteria for its determining for criminal proceedings. The research methodology includes comparative legal, systematic, functional, formal legal and others methods. The results of the study. The period which is taken into account in calculation of a reasonable time and the criteria for its determining is studied comprehensively as a basis for definition of the notion of reasonable time. Practical implication. The range of suggestions for improvements of Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation relating content of reasonable time and mechanism used to their calculate is defined. Value / originality. Based on the results of an analysis the authors’ concept of reasonable time is proposed.

scholarly journals DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN COURT ON HUMAN RIGHTS AS MANDATORY ELEMENT OF JUDICIAL CONTROLIN CRIMINAL PROCEEDING

2019 ◽  
pp. 284-294
Author(s):  
O. Plakhotnik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Draw Conclusion ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
And Function

The purpose of this article is opening of necessity of application of ECHR practice in the decisions of the investigating judge to increase the value of judicial control over the observance of rights, freedoms and interests of individuals in criminal proceedings. The article includes analysis of the current legislation on the definition of judicial review at the pre-trial investigation stage. Judicial control is revealed through the powers of the investigating judge in criminal proceedings. There were examined opinions of scientists in relation to determinations of judicial control and function of investigation judge on the stage of pre-trial investigation. It is possible to draw conclusion from the analysis of the last scientific researches, that expansion of scopes of judicial control in a criminal production, it is a next step to rethink the value of judicial control in criminal proceedings. Decisions taken by the investigating judge should be based on the principles of legality and rule of law. The conclusion about the need to study the application of ECHR investigating judges to strengthen the role of the court at the stage of pre-trial investigation and reduction of procedural errors that can become new ECHR judgments against Ukraine. Judicial statistics and decision of consequence judges content are analysed with the use of practice of ECHR for 2018 and beginning 2019 years. Out of analysis of judicial statistics a conclusion is made that tendency on application of practice of ECHR in 2019 is slowly, but grows. The necessity of wide use of practice of ECHR courts is examined during realization of judicial control in a criminal proceedings. The estimation is given to expansion of the list of proceedings that must be carried out with the permission of the investigating judge. It is analyzed the shortcomings of the application of the ECHR practice courts and disadvantages such as the decision by the investigating judge ruling, not under criminal procedural rules. The practice of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court is analysed. It is given the risks of the work of the investigating judge, who can relate to undue interference in the work of law enforcement. It is noted the decision of the ECHR “Volokhi against Ukraine” dated November 2, 2006. It is concluded that the judicial review of the investigative actions should also include the application of the ECHR practice, and application of ECHR in the activities of the investigating judge at the pre-trial investigation stage is a prerequisite for respect for the rule rights in criminal proceedings and the strategic task for Ukraine. Key words: European Court of Human Rights, court control, criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals GARANTISMO, SISTEMA ACUSATÓRIO E A PRODUÇÃO DE PROVA EX OFFICIO PELO MAGISTRADO

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (59) ◽  
pp. 210
Author(s):  
Teodoro Silva SANTOS ◽  
Nestor Eduardo Araruna SANTIAGO
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Process ◽  
Accurate Analysis ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
European Court

RESUMO Objetivo: A análise da possibilidade de produção de provas ex officio pelo magistrado, prevista na redação do inciso I do art. 156 do Código de Processo Penal, advinda da reforma implementada pela Lei nº. 11.690/2008, que alterou os dispositivos relativos à prova no Processo Penal à luz da Constituição e do Garantismo Penal. Metodologia: Métodos analítico e dedutivo, mediante pesquisa bibliográfica e documental de doutrina e jurisprudência, especialmente dos tribunais superiores brasileiros e do Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos, no âmbito do modelo garantista constitucional e também legal. Resultados: A possibilidade de iniciativa probatória pelo juiz no processo penal antes de iniciada a ação penal, expressa no art. 156, inciso I, do Código de Processo Penal, com a redação advinda da Lei nº. 11.690/2008, contrapõe-se ao garantismo penal, bem como à Constituição, por colocar em risco a imparcialidade judicial. A norma se exprime como resquício de um regime inquisitorial, por afrontar os direitos e as garantias fundamentais, notadamente o princípio da imparcialidade, alcançado por meio do distanciamento do magistrado da função probatória. Contribuições: O tema é relevante, pois abre espaço para uma análise precisa da persecução da verdade no contexto do processo penal ante a possibilidade de atuação ex officio do juiz na produção de provas, fato este que se contrapõe ao sistema processual acusatório adotado no Brasil, centrado na existência de sujeitos processuais diversos e detentores de funções distintas: acusar, defender e julgar, em consonância com o princípio do devido processo legal e de outros princípios corolários deste. Palavras-chave: sistema acusatório; garantismo processual; produção de prova ex officio; imparcialidade. ABSTRACT Objective: To analyze the possibility of producing ex officio evidence by the magistrate, provided for in item I of article 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arising from the reform implemented by Law no. 11,690 / 2008, which amended the provisions relating to evidence in the Criminal Procedure in the light of the Constitution and the Penal Guarantee. Methodology: Analytic and deductive methods, by way of bibliographic and documentary research of doctrine and jurisprudence, especially from the Brazilian higher courts and the European Court of Human Rights, within the scope of the constitutional and also legal guarantee model. Results: The possibility of evidential initiative by the judge in the criminal process before the beginning of the criminal lawsuit, expressed in Article 156, item I of the Criminal Procedure Code, with the wording granted by Law no. 11,690/2008, opposes the criminal guarantee, as well as the Constitution, for putting at risk the judicial impartiality. The law expresses as a remnant of an inquisitorial regime to affront fundamental rights and guarantees, notably the principle of impartiality, achieved by way of distancing the magistrate from the evidence function. Contributions: The topic is relevant, as it opens up an accurate analysis of the pursuit of the truth in the context of criminal proceedings given the possibility of ex officio action by the judge in the production of evidence, a fact that contrasts with the accusatory procedural system adopted in Brazil, centered in the existence of different procedural subjects and holders of different functions: accusing, defending and judging, in line with the principle of due legal process and other corollary principles thereof. Keywords: accusatory system; procedural guarantee; production of ex officio evidence; impartiality.

scholarly journals DISTURBED PRECEDENTING OF THE LAW IN PRACTICE OF THE COURT OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Milan Blagojević
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Criminal Sentencing ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

The subject of this paper is one model developed in practice of theCourt of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it is related to unconstitutional retroactiveimplementation of incrimination crimes against humanity. Foundationsof this problem are laid in the decisions of Hague Tribunal, andthen in the decisions of the European Court for Human Rights. These decisionsare afterwards accepted without any critique in practice of the Courtof Bosnia and Herzegovina in criminal proceedings led regarding this incrimination.This is the model of disturbed precedenting of the law. In thepaper this problem has been clarified by the author on one case from theCourt practice, which unfortunately is not the only example in reality. Theessence of this problem is in the Court sentencing verdicts reached againstindividuals. Namely, assertions that widespread and systematic attackagainst civilian population is carried out by the Army and Police of the Republicof Srpska are expounded in these verdicts, but not confirmed by validproofs and arguments. This is the way for criminal sentencing of not onlyindividuals (natural persons) but the Republic of Srpska as well, withoutenabling it to defend itself from such unfounded accusations. When theCourt of Bosnia and Herzegovina is trying to find arguments for such verdictsin the decisions of the Hague Tribunal and in the decisions of theEuropean Court of Human Rights, it is defective since decisions of these internationalinstitutions are defective as well. All this in final can cause seriousconsequences against the Republic of Srpska, which (these consequences)can be not only of criminal nature but of constitutional nature aswell.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document