The presentation focused on the problem of the artificial division of the evaluation of evidence in criminal proceedings into so-called preliminary (sometimes referred to as “reasonable”) and final evaluations.
This problem is purely practical in nature and leads to a situation where investigating judges, while exercising judicial oversight, are effectively relieved of their duties: they do not evaluate evidence for relevance, admissibility, reliability, and sufficiency. As a result, unfair and unfounded court decisions are often rendered.
“There is no such thing as a preliminary (reasonable) evaluation of evidence. Every evaluation of evidence in criminal proceedings is exclusively final in nature,” notes Yuriy Radzievsky.
We thank the organizers for the invitation and the opportunity to participate in these professional discussions.
Author: Yuriy Radzievsky, Attorney and Partner at Barristers
Source: Barristers Facebook