Standards of fair justice and their relationship to standards of proof in criminal proceedings
Palabras clave:
derecho a un juicio justo, estándares de justicia imparcial, estándares de prueba, procesos penales, Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos
Resumen
El propósito del artículo es definir el concepto, sistema y contenido de los estándares de justicia justa y esbozar su relación con los estándares de prueba en los procesos penales. El objeto del estudio es revelar el contenido del derecho a un juicio justo, distinguir los estándares de justicia justa y establecer su relación con los estándares de prueba en los procesos penales. La metodología de investigación consiste en el derecho comparado, los métodos estructurales de sistema y los métodos legales formales. El estudio encontró que los estándares de prueba están cubiertos por los estándares de justicia, ampliando, especificando y aclarando su contenido. El contenido de las normas de justicia justa “examen del caso por un tribunal independiente e imparcial establecido por la ley”, “procedimiento contradictorio”, “igualdad de las partes”, “franqueza del examen de las pruebas”, “presunción de inocencia” y se revela la “motivación de las decisiones judiciales”. Se concluye que cada uno de estos conceptos es un aporte heurístico para con estándares de prueba. Como resultado del estudio, se formula la definición del autor del concepto de “estándares de justicia justa” y se fundamenta el concepto en su relación con los estándares de prueba en los procesos penales.
Descargas
La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.
Citas
ALEKSEEVSKAYA, Ekateryna. 2016. “Establishing a single level of legal guaranteesforafairtrialinthelegalregulationoflegalproceedingsisameans ofeffectivelyensuringhumanrights”In:Law:JournaloftheHigherSchool ofEconomics,Vol.2,pp.100-110.Availableonline.In:https://law-journal. hse.ru/data/2016/07/13/1116455761/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0% B 5%D0 %B A %D1 %81 %D 0 %B 5%D 0 %B 5%D0 %B 2 %D 1 %81 %
D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F.pdf. Date of consultation: 12/03/2020.
BASAY, Viktor; HRYNIUK, Volodymyr; KOVALCHUK, Serhii. 2019. “Standards of proof in the criminal procedure of the United States of America and Ukraine: A comparative research” In: Amazonia Investiga. Vol. 8, Issue 22, pp. 550-559. Available online. In: https://amazoniainvestiga. info/index.php/amazonia/article/view/801. Date of consultation: 12/03/2020.
BEREZHANSKY, Genadii. 2017. “Features of understanding the right to a fair trial” In: Bulletin of criminal proceedings, Vol. 3, pp. 191–196. Available online. In: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/vkc_2017_3_23. Date of consultation: 12/006/2020.
BOGGS, Danny. 1998. “The Right to a Fair Trial” In: University of Chicago Legal Forum. Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 1-24.
BORYSLAVSKA, Оlena. 2021. “Judicial Reforms in Eastern Europe: Ensuring the Right to a Fair Trial or an Attack on the Independence of the Judiciary?” In: Access to Justice in Eastern Europe. Vol. 1, No. 9, pp. 122- 142.
BRICH, Larysa. 2017. “The right to a reasoned court decision in criminal proceedings as a component of the right to a fair trial in the interpretation of the ECHR” In: University scientific notes. Vol. 63, pp. 268-281. Available online. In: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Unzap_2017_3_26. Date of consultation: 12/06/2020.
CLAUDE, Ophelia. 2010. “A Comparative Approach to Enforced Disappearances in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the ECHR Jurisprudence” In: Intercultural Human Rights Law Review. Vol. 5, pp. 407-462. Available online. In: https://www.stu.edu/portals/law/ docs/human-rights/ihrlr/volumes/5/407-462-opheliaclaude-acompara tiveapproachtoenforceddisappearancesintheinter-americancourtofhum anrightsandtheeuropeancourtofhumanrightsjurisprudence.pdf. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
CLERMONT, Kevin; SHERWIN, Emily. 2002. “A Comparative View of Standards of Proof” In: American Journal of Comparative Law, 50, 243-275. Available online. In: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/ facpub/222. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
ECHR, 2008. Grădinar v. Moldova: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 1992. Edwards v. the United Kingdom: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 1995. Allenet de Ribemont v. France: Judgment. Strasburg, France. ECHR. 1996. Doorson v. the Netherlands: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 1999. García Ruiz v. Spain: Judgment.
ECHR. 2000. Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom: Judgment. Strasburg,
France.
ECHR. 2002. P.K. v. Finland: Final Decision. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 2003. Georgios Papageorgiou v. Greece: Judgment of the ECHR from 9 May 2003. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/ eng?i=001-61091. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
ECHR. 2003. Suominen v. Finland: Judgment. Strasburg, France. ECHR. 2005. Kyprianou v. Cyprus: Judgment. Strasburg, France. ECHR. 2006. Sejdovic v. Italy: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 2007. Sara Lind Eggertsdóttir v. Iceland: Judgment of the ECHR from 5 July 2007. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/ fre?i=001-81432. Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
ECHR. 2008. Mirilashvili v. Russia: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 2010. Mukhutdinov v. Russia: Judgment of the ECHR from 10 June 2010. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-99212. Date of consultation: 12/10/2020.
ECHR. 2011. Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan: Judgment of the ECHR from 26 July 2011. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/ eng?i=001-105823. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
ECHR. 2011. Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 2011. Nechiporuk and Yonkalo v. Ukraine: Judgment. ECHR, 2011. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-104613. Date of consultation: 12/10/2020.
ECHR. 2013. Rudnichenko v. Ukraine: Judgment. Strasburg, France. ECHR. 2015. Schatschaschwili v. Germany: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
GLOVYUK, Iryna. 2011. “Access to court in criminal proceedings: problems of theory” In: Journal of the Academy of Advocacy of Ukraine. Vol. 4, Issue 2, No. 11, pp. 1-7.
HARRIS, David. 1967. “The Right to a Fair Trial in Criminal Proceedings as a Human Right” In: The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 16, Issue 2, pp. 352-378.
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE (HRC). 2007. General comment no. 32, Article 14, Right to equality before courts and tribunals and to fair trial, 23 August 2007, CCPR/C/GC/32. Available online. In: https://www. refworld.org/docid/478b2b2f2.html. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
KRET, Galyna. 2020. International standards of proof in the criminal process of Ukraine: theoretial, legal and practical foundations. (doctoral thesis). National University «Odesa Law Academy», Odesa. Available online. In: http://dspace.onua.edu.ua/bitstream/ handle/11300/13756/%D0%9A%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%82%20
%D0%93.%D0%A0.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.Dateofconsultation:
12/10/2020.
LANGFORD, Ian. 2009. “Fair Trial: The History of an Idea” In: Journal of Human Rights. Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 37-52.
MAHONEY, Paul. 2004. “Right to a Fair Trial in Criminal Matters under Article 6 E.C.H.R” In: Judicial Studies Institute Journal. Vol, 4, No. 2, pp. 107-129.
MORSHCHAKOVA, Tamara. Ed. 2012. Fair justice standards (international and national practices). Available online. In: http://kalinovsky-k.narod. ru/b/Morshakova_min.pdf. Date of consultation: 12/10/2020.
PEREZHNIAK, Boris; BALOBANOVA, Dariia; TIMOFIEIEVA, Liliia; TAVLUI, Olena; POLIUK, Yuliia. 2021. “The right to a fair trial: conceptual rethinking in an era of quarantine restrictions” In: Amazonia Investiga, Vol.1,No.38,pp.168-177.Availableonline.In:https://doi.org/10.34069/ AI/2021.38.02.16. Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
POGORETSKY, Mykola; HRYTSENKO, Ivan. 2012. “The right to a fair trial” In: Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Legal sciences. Vol. 91, pp. 4-8.
RABINOVYCH Patro; RATUSHNA Bogdana. 2014. “General theoretical problems of the right to proper proof in Ukrainian proceedings (in the light of the practice of the Strasbourg court)” In: Bulletin of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine. Vol. 3, No. 78, pp. 7-19. Available online. In: http://visnyk.kh.ua/web/uploads/pdf/ilovepdf_com-7-19. pdf Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
SIZAM, Natalia. 2012. “The system of elements of the right to a fair trial” In: Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Law Series. Vol. 4, pp. 194-199.
TKACHUK, Oleh. 2016. “Classification of elements of the right to a fair trial: national theory and practice of the ECHR” In: Prykarpattya Legal Bulletin. Vol. 1, pp. 71-77.
TRUBNIKOVA, Tetiana. 2016. “Problems of proof in a fair trial and their reflection in the legal positions of the ECHR: challenges for the Russian science of criminal procedure and law enforcement practice” In: Criminal Justice, Vol. 1, pp. 135-147. Available online. In: https://cyberleninka. ru/article/n/problemy-dokazyvaniya-v-spravedlivom-sudebnom- razbiratelstve-i-ih-otrazhenie-v-pravovyh-pozitsiyah-espch-vyzovy- dlya-rossiyskoy-nauki. Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
TUZET, Giovanni 2021. “Evidence Assessment and Standards of Proof: a Messy Issue. Quaestio facti” In: International Journal on Evidential Legal Reasoning. Seccion: Ensayos, Vol. 2, pp. 87–113. Available online. In: https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/ download/22480/26276. Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
UNITED NATIONS. 1950. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Available online. In: https://www.echr.coe.int/ documents/convention_eng.pdf. Date of consultation: 16/06/2020.
VAPNIARCHUK, Viacheslav: TROFYMENKO, Volodymyr; SHYLO, Olha; MARYNIV, Volodymy. 2018. “Standards of Criminal Procedure Evidence” In: Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics. Vol. IX, No. 7, pp. 2472-2480.
D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F.pdf. Date of consultation: 12/03/2020.
BASAY, Viktor; HRYNIUK, Volodymyr; KOVALCHUK, Serhii. 2019. “Standards of proof in the criminal procedure of the United States of America and Ukraine: A comparative research” In: Amazonia Investiga. Vol. 8, Issue 22, pp. 550-559. Available online. In: https://amazoniainvestiga. info/index.php/amazonia/article/view/801. Date of consultation: 12/03/2020.
BEREZHANSKY, Genadii. 2017. “Features of understanding the right to a fair trial” In: Bulletin of criminal proceedings, Vol. 3, pp. 191–196. Available online. In: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/vkc_2017_3_23. Date of consultation: 12/006/2020.
BOGGS, Danny. 1998. “The Right to a Fair Trial” In: University of Chicago Legal Forum. Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 1-24.
BORYSLAVSKA, Оlena. 2021. “Judicial Reforms in Eastern Europe: Ensuring the Right to a Fair Trial or an Attack on the Independence of the Judiciary?” In: Access to Justice in Eastern Europe. Vol. 1, No. 9, pp. 122- 142.
BRICH, Larysa. 2017. “The right to a reasoned court decision in criminal proceedings as a component of the right to a fair trial in the interpretation of the ECHR” In: University scientific notes. Vol. 63, pp. 268-281. Available online. In: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Unzap_2017_3_26. Date of consultation: 12/06/2020.
CLAUDE, Ophelia. 2010. “A Comparative Approach to Enforced Disappearances in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the ECHR Jurisprudence” In: Intercultural Human Rights Law Review. Vol. 5, pp. 407-462. Available online. In: https://www.stu.edu/portals/law/ docs/human-rights/ihrlr/volumes/5/407-462-opheliaclaude-acompara tiveapproachtoenforceddisappearancesintheinter-americancourtofhum anrightsandtheeuropeancourtofhumanrightsjurisprudence.pdf. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
CLERMONT, Kevin; SHERWIN, Emily. 2002. “A Comparative View of Standards of Proof” In: American Journal of Comparative Law, 50, 243-275. Available online. In: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/ facpub/222. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
ECHR, 2008. Grădinar v. Moldova: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 1992. Edwards v. the United Kingdom: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 1995. Allenet de Ribemont v. France: Judgment. Strasburg, France. ECHR. 1996. Doorson v. the Netherlands: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 1999. García Ruiz v. Spain: Judgment.
ECHR. 2000. Rowe and Davis v. the United Kingdom: Judgment. Strasburg,
France.
ECHR. 2002. P.K. v. Finland: Final Decision. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 2003. Georgios Papageorgiou v. Greece: Judgment of the ECHR from 9 May 2003. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/ eng?i=001-61091. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
ECHR. 2003. Suominen v. Finland: Judgment. Strasburg, France. ECHR. 2005. Kyprianou v. Cyprus: Judgment. Strasburg, France. ECHR. 2006. Sejdovic v. Italy: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 2007. Sara Lind Eggertsdóttir v. Iceland: Judgment of the ECHR from 5 July 2007. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/ fre?i=001-81432. Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
ECHR. 2008. Mirilashvili v. Russia: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 2010. Mukhutdinov v. Russia: Judgment of the ECHR from 10 June 2010. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-99212. Date of consultation: 12/10/2020.
ECHR. 2011. Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan: Judgment of the ECHR from 26 July 2011. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/ eng?i=001-105823. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
ECHR. 2011. Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
ECHR. 2011. Nechiporuk and Yonkalo v. Ukraine: Judgment. ECHR, 2011. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-104613. Date of consultation: 12/10/2020.
ECHR. 2013. Rudnichenko v. Ukraine: Judgment. Strasburg, France. ECHR. 2015. Schatschaschwili v. Germany: Judgment. Strasburg, France.
GLOVYUK, Iryna. 2011. “Access to court in criminal proceedings: problems of theory” In: Journal of the Academy of Advocacy of Ukraine. Vol. 4, Issue 2, No. 11, pp. 1-7.
HARRIS, David. 1967. “The Right to a Fair Trial in Criminal Proceedings as a Human Right” In: The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 16, Issue 2, pp. 352-378.
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE (HRC). 2007. General comment no. 32, Article 14, Right to equality before courts and tribunals and to fair trial, 23 August 2007, CCPR/C/GC/32. Available online. In: https://www. refworld.org/docid/478b2b2f2.html. Date of consultation: 12/12/2020.
KRET, Galyna. 2020. International standards of proof in the criminal process of Ukraine: theoretial, legal and practical foundations. (doctoral thesis). National University «Odesa Law Academy», Odesa. Available online. In: http://dspace.onua.edu.ua/bitstream/ handle/11300/13756/%D0%9A%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%82%20
%D0%93.%D0%A0.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.Dateofconsultation:
12/10/2020.
LANGFORD, Ian. 2009. “Fair Trial: The History of an Idea” In: Journal of Human Rights. Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 37-52.
MAHONEY, Paul. 2004. “Right to a Fair Trial in Criminal Matters under Article 6 E.C.H.R” In: Judicial Studies Institute Journal. Vol, 4, No. 2, pp. 107-129.
MORSHCHAKOVA, Tamara. Ed. 2012. Fair justice standards (international and national practices). Available online. In: http://kalinovsky-k.narod. ru/b/Morshakova_min.pdf. Date of consultation: 12/10/2020.
PEREZHNIAK, Boris; BALOBANOVA, Dariia; TIMOFIEIEVA, Liliia; TAVLUI, Olena; POLIUK, Yuliia. 2021. “The right to a fair trial: conceptual rethinking in an era of quarantine restrictions” In: Amazonia Investiga, Vol.1,No.38,pp.168-177.Availableonline.In:https://doi.org/10.34069/ AI/2021.38.02.16. Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
POGORETSKY, Mykola; HRYTSENKO, Ivan. 2012. “The right to a fair trial” In: Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Legal sciences. Vol. 91, pp. 4-8.
RABINOVYCH Patro; RATUSHNA Bogdana. 2014. “General theoretical problems of the right to proper proof in Ukrainian proceedings (in the light of the practice of the Strasbourg court)” In: Bulletin of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine. Vol. 3, No. 78, pp. 7-19. Available online. In: http://visnyk.kh.ua/web/uploads/pdf/ilovepdf_com-7-19. pdf Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
SIZAM, Natalia. 2012. “The system of elements of the right to a fair trial” In: Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Law Series. Vol. 4, pp. 194-199.
TKACHUK, Oleh. 2016. “Classification of elements of the right to a fair trial: national theory and practice of the ECHR” In: Prykarpattya Legal Bulletin. Vol. 1, pp. 71-77.
TRUBNIKOVA, Tetiana. 2016. “Problems of proof in a fair trial and their reflection in the legal positions of the ECHR: challenges for the Russian science of criminal procedure and law enforcement practice” In: Criminal Justice, Vol. 1, pp. 135-147. Available online. In: https://cyberleninka. ru/article/n/problemy-dokazyvaniya-v-spravedlivom-sudebnom- razbiratelstve-i-ih-otrazhenie-v-pravovyh-pozitsiyah-espch-vyzovy- dlya-rossiyskoy-nauki. Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
TUZET, Giovanni 2021. “Evidence Assessment and Standards of Proof: a Messy Issue. Quaestio facti” In: International Journal on Evidential Legal Reasoning. Seccion: Ensayos, Vol. 2, pp. 87–113. Available online. In: https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/ download/22480/26276. Date of consultation: 16/08/2020.
UNITED NATIONS. 1950. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Available online. In: https://www.echr.coe.int/ documents/convention_eng.pdf. Date of consultation: 16/06/2020.
VAPNIARCHUK, Viacheslav: TROFYMENKO, Volodymyr; SHYLO, Olha; MARYNIV, Volodymy. 2018. “Standards of Criminal Procedure Evidence” In: Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics. Vol. IX, No. 7, pp. 2472-2480.
Publicado
2021-12-24
Cómo citar
Kovalchuk, S., Korytko, L., Kret, G., Fomin, S., & Hryniuk, V. (2021). Standards of fair justice and their relationship to standards of proof in criminal proceedings. Cuestiones Políticas, 39(71), 957-971. https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3971.58
Sección
Derecho Público
Copyright
Los autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos:
Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho de ser la primera publicación donde se presenta el artículo, el cual se publica bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License, que permite a otros compartir el trabajo previo el reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y de la publicación inicial en esta revista.
Los autores pueden establecer por separado acuerdos adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión de la obra publicada en la revista (por ejemplo, situarlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en esta revista.
Esta obra está bajo la licencia:
Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
