Estándares de justicia justa y su relación con los estándares de prueba en procesos penales

• Serhii Kovalchuk National University «Odessa Law Academy» https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6285-099X
• Liliia Korytko National University «Odessa Law Academy» https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3812-205X
• Galyna Kret Supreme Court https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4906-4799
• Serhii Fomin Supreme Court https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1203-5633
• Volodymyr Hryniuk Taras Shevchenko Kyiv National University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6340-0584

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3971.58

Keywords: right to a fair trial, standards of impartial justice, test standards, criminal proceedings, European Court of Human Rights

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to define the concept, system and content of fair justice standards and outline their relationship to standards of evidence in criminal proceedings. The purpose of the study is to reveal the content of the right to a fair trial, distinguish fair justice standards and establish its relationship with standards of evidence in criminal proceedings. The research methodology consists of comparative law, structural system methods and formal legal methods. The study found that testing standards are covered by justice standards, expanding, specifying, and clarifying their content. The content of the fair justice standards “examination of the case by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law”, “adversarial procedure”, “equality of the parties”, “frankness of the examination of evidence”, “presumption of innocence” and reveals the “motivation of judicial decisions”. It is concluded that each of these concepts is a heuristic contribution to test standards. As a result of the study, the author’s definition of the concept of “fair justice standards” is formulated and the concept is based on its relationship with the standards of evidence in criminal proceedings.

References

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.