#04/2

Permanent URI for this collection

https://elar.naiau.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/24946

Browse

Browsing #04/2 by Subject "evidence"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    КАТУВАННЯ ЯК ПІДСТАВА НЕДОПУСТИМОСТІ ДОКАЗІВ. TORTURE AS A GROUND FOR INADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
    (2021) ГРИЦЕНКО, Марина Віталіївна; HRYTSENKO, Maryna
    У статті розглянуто катування як підставу недопустимості доказів в українському законодавстві та у практиці Європейського суду з прав людини. Виокремлено причини застосування катувань правоохоронцями. Визначено запобіжники, впроваджені Україною, для боротьби зі застосуванням такого нелюдського поводження з боку суб’єктів владних повноважень. Проаналізовано зміни думки Європейського суду з прав людини з даного питання та її значення для України. Виокремлені шляхи реагування для національних судів. The European Court of Human Rights, which focuses on the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, points to the importance of the prohibition of torture. The Court has formed its position based on the importance of Article 3 of the Convention and, consequently, the inadmissibility of the evidence obtained in violation of that article by the prosecution. This paper analyzes the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on the implementation of evidence-based activities in national legal systems, and in particular examines the requirements of the Court on the admissibility of evidence-based exercise and activity obtained in the course of work results. The paper demonstrates the ECHR's practice on the issue of torture in obtaining evidence and the consequences of using such a «method», its significance for the practice of national courts and the modernization of the position of courts in relation to the dynamics of this issue. As a result, problematic areas of Ukrainian legislation and justice were identified. The reasons for the use of torture by the authorities and the safeguards introduced by Ukraine to combat the use of such inhuman treatment by the authorities were identified. Changes in the opinion of the European Court of Human Rights on this issue and its significance for Ukraine are analyzed. The possibilities of application of the ECHR for evaluation of admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings in Ukraine are examined. The patterns characterizing the legal positions of the ECHR in assessing the admissibility of evidence are discovered and singled out. Ukraine should take into account that the responsibilities of the state, in addition to refraining from the use of torture to obtain evidence, include the protection of people from these encroachments by third parties.