Stepenovanje sumnje i dokazna načela u krivičnom postupku

Abstract

Autor se u članku bavi stepenovanjem sumnje u vezi sa dokaznim načelom u krivičnom postupku. Među osnovnim načelima krivičnog postupka dokazna načela su: načelo slobodne ocene dokaza, načelo neposrednosti i načelo in dubio pro reo. U članku se takođe diskutuje o razmatranju dokaza u krivičnom postupku, naročito o vrednovanju dokaza. Za vrednovanje dokaza najvažnija su dva proceduralna načela: načelo slobodne ocene dokaza i načelo in dubio pro reo. Sud i državni organi koji učestvuju u krivičnom postupku imaju obavezu da ustanove istinu i činjenice koje su ključne za donošenje zakonite presude. Sud i državni organi su obavezni da pregledaju i utvrde sa podjednakom pažnjom činjenice koje terete optuženog kao i one koje idu u korist optuženom. Ukoliko nakon prikupljanja svih raspoloživih dokaza i njihovog izlaganja tokom krivičnog postupka, postoji samo sumnja koja se odnosi na neka svojstva krivičnog dela ili se tiče činjenica od kojih zavisi primena izvesne odredbe krivičnog zakona ili ovog statuta, sud, tj. drugo odgovorno telo, će uvek doneti presudu u korist optuženog. Uprkos obavezi suda da ustanovi istinu, u nekim situacijama sud nije u mogućnosti da ustanovi ključne činjenice. U takvoj situaciji važi pravilo sumnje u korist optuženog. Svaka osoba će se smatrati nedužnom dok se ne dokaže njena krivica je zakonski obavezujuća presuda merodavnog suda. Državni organi, mediji, udruženja građana, javne ličnosti i druge osobe su obavezne da poštuju pretpostavku nevinosti kao i da se uzdržavaju od kršenja drugih pravila ovog načela, prava optuženog i oštećene strane, sudsku nezavisnost i nepristrasnost. U mnogim slučajevima, nažalost, mas-mediji krše pretpostavku nevinosti i nekada se dešava 'presuda pre presude' što može da bude vrsta pritiska na sud. Za pravni sistem u pravnoj državi, veoma je važno zaštititi optuženog od kršenja pretpostavke o nevinosti i osigurati nezavisnost i nepristrasnost suda.

Author writes about graduation of the doubt connected with the evidential principles in criminal procedure. Among the basic principles of the criminal procedure, the evidential principles are the principle of free evidence, the principle of directly evidences and the principle of in dubio pro reo. In the article is written too about the evidential contemplating in criminal procedure, especially about evaluation of evidences. For evaluation of evidences two procedural principles are most vital - the principle of free evidence and the principle in dubio pro reo. The court and state bodies participating in the criminal procedure have the obligation to establish the truth and the facts essential for delivering a lawful judgment. The court and the state bodies are obliged to examine and establish with equal attention both the facts burdening the defendant, as well as those to the benefit of the defendant If upon gathering of all available evidence and its presentation in the criminal procedure, only suspicion remains concerning the existence of a certain feature of a criminal act or concerning facts upon which depends the application of a certain provision of a Criminal Law or this Code, the court, i.e., another competent body shall always deliver a judgment more favorable for the defendant. But, never less of the obligation of the court to establish the truth, the court in some situations is not in the position to establish essential facts. For this situations is valid the rule on doubt for the benefit of the defendant. If upon gathering of all available evidence and its presentation in the criminal procedure, only suspicion remains concerning the existence of a certain feature of a criminal act or concerning facts upon which depends the application of a certain provision of a Criminal Law or this Code, the court, i.e., another competent body shall always deliver a judgment more favorable for the defendant. Each person shall be considered innocent until proven guilty by the legally binding judgment of the competent court. State bodies, the media, citizens' associations, public figures and other persons, are under obligation to respect the presumption of innocence, as well as to sustain from violating other rules of the procedure, rights of the defendant and injured party, judicial independence and impartiality. Unfortunately in many situations mass media violate the presumption of innocence and sometimes it is 'the conviction before the conviction' and could be a kind of pressure to the court. For a legal system in a state with the rule of law, it is very vital to protect the defendants of the violation of the presumption of innocence and to secure the independence and impartiality of the court.