Standard of proof «sufficient reason» in the criminal procedure of Ukraine

M. Pohoretskiy, O. Mitskan
{"title":"Standard of proof «sufficient reason» in the criminal procedure of Ukraine","authors":"M. Pohoretskiy, O. Mitskan","doi":"10.17721/2413-5372.2019.3/31-42","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Based on the results of analysis of foreign doctrine, foreign procedural legislation, foreign law enforcement practice, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.\n\nIn the article explores problematic issues of the application of the standard of proof “sufficient reason” in the domestic criminal process.\n\nThe relevance of the article is that the standard of proof “sufficient reason” or “probable cause” in the system of standard of proof in the domestic criminal process has a special place and using to accept most procedural decisions at the pre-trial investigation.\n\nThe purpose of the article is to substantiation the main direction of using in the criminal proceed of Ukraine standard of proof “sufficient reason” taking into account the legal nature of this standard.\n\nIn the article proved that “sufficient reason” is the standard of proof in the criminal proceed of Ukraine execution of which is based on “common sense” and in the factual analysis (assessment) of the whole set of facts and circumstance in their integrity, authorized entities with the use of special knowledges and experience on establishing “sufficient reason” for making appropriate procedural decision.\n\nImplementation of the standard of proof “sufficient reason” as well as “reasonable suspicion” doesn`t envisage a lack of doubt as guilty of the person. Sufficient is a possible knowledge about committing criminal offence by person with the difference that for the highest standard measures have to be higher. Moreover, within “flexible” standard of proof “sufficient reason” of the level of probability can also vary, depending on how much negatively appropriate procedural decision will affect the rights of the person.\n\nProve that in the current Criminal procedural code of Ukraine the standard of proof “sufficient reason” is used to accept most procedural decisions at the pre-trial investigation stage in criminal proceedings, when the most reasonable suspicion of a committing person criminal offence is insufficient due to significant restrictions on human rights as a result of appropriate decision. At that, the flexible nature of the standard of evidence \"sufficient reason\", which consists in the required measure conviction the appropriate standard from the circumstances of the specific criminal proceedings, allows you to assert its suitability for Making a wide range of procedural decisions.\n\nStandard of proof “sufficient reason” is used for adoption of such procedural decisions: on the application of certain measures to ensure criminal proceedings; in addressing the issue of applying precautionary measures as a variety of measures to ensure criminal proceedings; in addressing the issue of individual investigative (detective) actions; in addressing the issue of granting permission for secret investigative (detective) actions and deciding on the use of the results of unspoken investigative actions in other criminal proceedings; when deciding on the placement of the person in the receiver-allocator for children (Part 4 art. 499 of the Criminal procedural code of Ukraine).","PeriodicalId":399656,"journal":{"name":"Herald of criminal justice","volume":"381-382 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/10.17721/2413-5372.2019.3/31-42","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

Based on the results of analysis of foreign doctrine, foreign procedural legislation, foreign law enforcement practice, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. In the article explores problematic issues of the application of the standard of proof “sufficient reason” in the domestic criminal process. The relevance of the article is that the standard of proof “sufficient reason” or “probable cause” in the system of standard of proof in the domestic criminal process has a special place and using to accept most procedural decisions at the pre-trial investigation. The purpose of the article is to substantiation the main direction of using in the criminal proceed of Ukraine standard of proof “sufficient reason” taking into account the legal nature of this standard. In the article proved that “sufficient reason” is the standard of proof in the criminal proceed of Ukraine execution of which is based on “common sense” and in the factual analysis (assessment) of the whole set of facts and circumstance in their integrity, authorized entities with the use of special knowledges and experience on establishing “sufficient reason” for making appropriate procedural decision. Implementation of the standard of proof “sufficient reason” as well as “reasonable suspicion” doesn`t envisage a lack of doubt as guilty of the person. Sufficient is a possible knowledge about committing criminal offence by person with the difference that for the highest standard measures have to be higher. Moreover, within “flexible” standard of proof “sufficient reason” of the level of probability can also vary, depending on how much negatively appropriate procedural decision will affect the rights of the person. Prove that in the current Criminal procedural code of Ukraine the standard of proof “sufficient reason” is used to accept most procedural decisions at the pre-trial investigation stage in criminal proceedings, when the most reasonable suspicion of a committing person criminal offence is insufficient due to significant restrictions on human rights as a result of appropriate decision. At that, the flexible nature of the standard of evidence "sufficient reason", which consists in the required measure conviction the appropriate standard from the circumstances of the specific criminal proceedings, allows you to assert its suitability for Making a wide range of procedural decisions. Standard of proof “sufficient reason” is used for adoption of such procedural decisions: on the application of certain measures to ensure criminal proceedings; in addressing the issue of applying precautionary measures as a variety of measures to ensure criminal proceedings; in addressing the issue of individual investigative (detective) actions; in addressing the issue of granting permission for secret investigative (detective) actions and deciding on the use of the results of unspoken investigative actions in other criminal proceedings; when deciding on the placement of the person in the receiver-allocator for children (Part 4 art. 499 of the Criminal procedural code of Ukraine).
乌克兰刑事诉讼中“充分理由”的证明标准
本文通过对国外学说、国外程序立法、国外执法实践、欧洲人权法院实践的结果分析。本文探讨了“充分理由”证明标准在国内刑事诉讼中适用的问题。本文的相关性在于,国内刑事诉讼证明标准制度中的“充分理由”或“可能原因”证明标准在审前侦查中具有特殊的地位和适用,适用于大多数程序性决定。本文的目的是在考虑到乌克兰“充分理由”证明标准的法律性质的基础上,论证乌克兰在刑事诉讼中使用“充分理由”证明标准的主要方向。该条证明,“充分理由”是乌克兰刑事诉讼中的证明标准,其执行是基于“常识”和对整套事实和情况的事实性分析(评估),授权实体利用特殊知识和经验确定作出适当程序决定的“充分理由”。实施“充分理由”和“合理怀疑”的证明标准并没有设想缺乏怀疑的人有罪。一个人对犯罪的可能知识是充分的,不同的是,对于最高标准,措施必须更高。此外,在“灵活”的证明标准内,“充分理由”的概率程度也可以有所不同,这取决于消极适当的程序性决定将在多大程度上影响当事人的权利。证明在乌克兰现行的刑事诉讼法中,“充分理由”的证明标准用于接受刑事诉讼审前调查阶段的大多数程序性决定,此时,由于适当的决定对人权造成重大限制,对犯罪人刑事犯罪的最合理怀疑是不足的。在这种情况下,证据标准“充分理由”的灵活性质,包括所需的措施定罪,从具体刑事诉讼的情况出发的适当标准,使你能够主张其适合于作出广泛的程序决定。通过这类程序性决定采用“充分理由”的证明标准:关于采取某些措施以确保刑事诉讼;处理适用预防措施的问题,作为确保刑事诉讼的各种措施;处理个别调查(侦探)行动的问题;处理准许进行秘密调查(侦探)行动的问题,以及决定在其他刑事诉讼中使用未明言的调查行动的结果;在决定该人在儿童接收分配器中的位置时(第4部分第2条)。《乌克兰刑事诉讼法》第499条)。
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