Compliance with the principle of adversarial in disclosing the materials of covert investigative (detective) actions to the defense

O. Yanovska
{"title":"Compliance with the principle of adversarial in disclosing the materials of covert investigative (detective) actions to the defense","authors":"O. Yanovska","doi":"10.17721/2413-5372.2019.3/81-89","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The defense has the right to have information about all elements of the procedural order of receiving the prosecution evidence, in particular, about the materials of the covert investigative (detective) actions (further - CIDA), which the latter intends to use against it in court. However, this right of defense is violated quite often. In addition, these issues remain unresolved at both the legislative and jurisprudence levels.\n\nThe purpose of the article is to address some of the problematic issues that arise during the disclosing the materials of CIDA to the defense at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings.\n\nThe research made it possible to draw the following conclusions from an analysis of the case-law of the national courts and of the European Court of Human Rights:\n\n1) if the prosecution timely fulfilled the requirements of Article 290 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (further - CPC of Ukraine), took all necessary and dependent measures aimed at declassification of materials that became the basis for the CIDA, but such materials were not declassified For reasons that did not depend on the prosecutor's procedural activity, there were no violations of the requirements of the said CPC of Ukraine by the prosecution. In such a case, the court shall evaluate the evidence obtained for their propriety and admissibility, as well as in combination with other evidence in the case, in accordance with the requirements of Article 94 of the CPC of Ukraine;\n\n2) if the prosecution on his own initiative and/or at the request of the party of defense did not take the necessary measures, which depend on it and aimed at declassification of the materials which became the basis for the CIDA, in that case there is a violation of the rules of Article 290 of the CPC of Ukraine the consequences provided for in paragraph 12 of this Article;\n\n3) if in the course of criminal proceedings in court, the prosecutor's repeated request for declassification of procedural documents which became the basis for the CIDA was granted and they were at the disposal of the prosecution party, then these procedural documents as received by the prosecution party after the transfer cases before the court should be opened in accordance with part eleven of Article 290 of the CPC of Ukraine.","PeriodicalId":399656,"journal":{"name":"Herald of criminal justice","volume":"99 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Herald of criminal justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17721/2413-5372.2019.3/81-89","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The defense has the right to have information about all elements of the procedural order of receiving the prosecution evidence, in particular, about the materials of the covert investigative (detective) actions (further - CIDA), which the latter intends to use against it in court. However, this right of defense is violated quite often. In addition, these issues remain unresolved at both the legislative and jurisprudence levels. The purpose of the article is to address some of the problematic issues that arise during the disclosing the materials of CIDA to the defense at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings. The research made it possible to draw the following conclusions from an analysis of the case-law of the national courts and of the European Court of Human Rights: 1) if the prosecution timely fulfilled the requirements of Article 290 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (further - CPC of Ukraine), took all necessary and dependent measures aimed at declassification of materials that became the basis for the CIDA, but such materials were not declassified For reasons that did not depend on the prosecutor's procedural activity, there were no violations of the requirements of the said CPC of Ukraine by the prosecution. In such a case, the court shall evaluate the evidence obtained for their propriety and admissibility, as well as in combination with other evidence in the case, in accordance with the requirements of Article 94 of the CPC of Ukraine; 2) if the prosecution on his own initiative and/or at the request of the party of defense did not take the necessary measures, which depend on it and aimed at declassification of the materials which became the basis for the CIDA, in that case there is a violation of the rules of Article 290 of the CPC of Ukraine the consequences provided for in paragraph 12 of this Article; 3) if in the course of criminal proceedings in court, the prosecutor's repeated request for declassification of procedural documents which became the basis for the CIDA was granted and they were at the disposal of the prosecution party, then these procedural documents as received by the prosecution party after the transfer cases before the court should be opened in accordance with part eleven of Article 290 of the CPC of Ukraine.
在向辩方披露秘密调查(侦探)行动的材料时,遵守对抗性原则
辩方有权获得关于接受控方证据的程序命令的所有内容的信息,特别是关于秘密调查(侦探)行动的材料的信息,后者打算在法庭上用来反对辩方。然而,这种辩护权经常受到侵犯。此外,这些问题在立法和法理学层面上仍未得到解决。本文的目的是解决刑事诉讼审前阶段向辩方披露CIDA材料过程中出现的一些问题。这项研究使人们能够从对国家法院和欧洲人权法院的判例法的分析中得出以下结论:1)如果控方及时履行了乌克兰刑事诉讼法第290条的要求,采取了一切必要和必要的措施,旨在解密成为《国际刑事诉讼法》基础的材料;但这些材料没有解密。由于与检察官的程序活动无关的原因,控方没有违反上述乌克兰CPC的要求。在这种情况下,适当的法院应当评估获得的证据和可容许,以及结合其他证据的情况下,按照第94条的要求中共乌克兰;2)如果起诉自己的倡议和/或国防的请求方不采取必要的措施,这取决于它和旨在解密材料成为了加拿大国际发展署的基础,在这种情况下,违反了乌克兰刑事诉讼法第290条的规定,即本条第12款所规定的后果;3)如果在法庭刑事诉讼过程中,检察官一再要求解密成为《国际刑事诉讼》基础的程序文件,并且这些文件可供控方使用,那么,起诉方在法院移送案件后收到的这些程序性文件应按照乌克兰《刑事诉讼法》第290条第11部分的规定予以公开。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信