Illegal Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Collection of Evidence by Authorized Officials of Internal Affairs Bodies

  • Katarina S. Živanović Ministry of Interior of Republic of Serbia
Keywords: illegal evidence, police, interrogation of the accused, investigation, temporary confiscation of items, search, jurisprudence of domestic courts

Abstract


The subject of the research is illegal evidence, i.e. the way in which authorized officials of the internal affairs authorities act, which may cause the illegality of the obtained evidence during the conducting evidential actions. The goal of the research is reflected in the scientific and practical contribution to the scientific and social community, since, in addition to the presentation and analysis of prominent scientific and theoretical concepts represented in domestic and foreign literature, the work contains a detailed presentation of the results of the analysis of judicial decisions of domestic courts, which gain particular importance having in the view that the institute of illegal evidence de facto represents judicial standards. Namely, the results indicate cases in which the court judged the evidence obtained by the police to be illegal, as well as cases in which, contrary to the claims of the legal remedy applicant, the court judged that the police did not act contrary to the legal norm when collecting evidence. In most cases, the following evidentiary actions are involved, provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code of Republic of Serbia: interrogation of the accused (Art. 85-90), investigation (Art. 133-136), temporary confiscation of items (Art. 147-151) and search (Art. 152 -160). In cases where the court still found that the evidence obtained by the police was illegal, it is not a question of a deliberate and gross violation of basic human rights and freedoms, that is, it is not a question of incriminated behavior of police officers, such as extorting a confession or abuse and torture. 

Author Biography

Katarina S. Živanović, Ministry of Interior of Republic of Serbia

Osnovne akademske studije završila sam na Kriminalističko policijskoj akademiji u Beogradu, kojom prilikom sam stekla stručni naziv diplomirani kriminalista.

Master akademske studije završila sam na Pravnom fakultetu u Novom Sadu Univerziteta u Novom Sadu, i nakon odrane master rada na temu "Krivično delo javno podsticanje na izvršenje terorističkih krivičnih dela" stekla sam akademski naziv master pravnik.

Doktorske studije završila sam na Pravnom fakultetu u Novom Sadu Univerziteta u Novom Sadu. Po odbrani doktorske disertacije "Žalba protiv presude u krivičnom postupku", stekla sam naucni naziv doktor pravnih nauka.

References

Bugarski, T. (2014). Dokazne radnje u krivičnom postupku. Pravni Fakultet Univerziteta u Novom Sadu.
Brkić, S. (2011). Upotreba nezakonitih dokaza u krivičnom postupku Srbije. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, XLV (1), pp. 183-214.
Court of Appeal in Belgrade, Kž1. 77/19, Decision of February 13, 2019.
Court of Appeal in Belgrade, Kž1. 176/20, Decision of September 10, 2020.
Court of Appeal in Novi Sad, Kž1. 1414/15, Decision of March 2, 2016.
Court of Appeal in Novi Sad, Kž1. 363/118, Decision of May 22, 2018.
Court of Appeal in Novi Sad, Kž2. 1506/19, Decision of October 29, 2019.
Court of Appeal in Niš, Kž. 557/14, Decision of February 5, 2015.
Court of Appeal in Niš, Kž. 2222/12, Decision of September 13, 2012.
Constitutional Court of Republic of Serbia, Už-4677, Decision of 2015 in: Official Gazette of Republic of Serbia no. 98/2020 and 114/2020.
Ćetenović, L. (2014). Dokazi na kojima se ne može zasnivati presuda. Bilten Vrhovnog kasacionog suda, 3/2014: 103-122.
Ćetenović, Lj., Blanuša, A. (2017). Sudska praksa Apelacionog suda u Kragujevcu u postupcima po pravnim lekovima. Bilten Vrhovnog kasacionog suda, 2/2017: 180-213.
Hight Court in Čačak, Kž 41/18, Decision of June 13, 2018.
Hight Court in Čačak, Kž 53/19, Decision of August 20, 2019.
Janković, S. (2007). Nedozvoljeni dokazi u sudskoj praksi. Bilten sudske prakse Vrhovnog suda Srbije, 3/2007: 215-237.
Krivični zakonik, Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, br. 85/2005, 88/2005 - ispr., 107/2005 - ispr., 72/2009, 111/2009, 121/2012, 104/2013, 108/2014, 94/2016 i 35/2019.
Pitler, R. (1968). The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Revisited and Shepardized. California Law Review, Volume 56, Issue 3, pp. 579-651.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz. 933/15, Judgment of November 4, 2015.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 239/16, Judgment of March 23, 2016.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 95/17, Judgment of February 8, 2017.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1199/2018, Judgment of November 6, 2018.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 706/2019, Judgment of October 3, 2019a.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 793/2019, Judgment of October 24, 2019b.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1205/2019, Judgment of November 21, 2019c.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 907/2019, Judgment of September 25, 2019d.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1393/20, Judgment of December 16, 2020a.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1044/20, Judgment of November 18, 2020b.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1424/19, Judgment of February 27, 2020c.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 640/20, Judgment of July 15, 2020d.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1438/19, Judgment of February 4, 2020e.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1378/19, Judgment of February 11, 2020f.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1155/21, Judgment of November 2, 2021a.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 813/21, Judgment of August31, 2021b.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 59/21, Judgment of January 27, 2021c.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 929/21, Judgment of September 21, 2021d.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 1155/21, Judgment of November 2, 2021a.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 182/22, Judgment of March 9, 2022a.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz 350/22, Judgment of May 24, 2022b.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz. 607/22, Judgment of July 6, 2022c.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz. 182/22, Judgment of May 18, 2022d.
Supreme Court of Cassation, Kzz. 713/22, Judgment of July 12, 2022e.
Supreme Court of the United States, Silverthorne Lumber Company v. United States, 251 U.S. 385, Decision of 1920, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/251/385/, 12.2.2024.
Supreme Court of the United States, Boyd v. United States. 116 U.S. 616, Decision of 1886, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/116/616/, 12.2.2024.
Škulić, M. (2013). Osnovne novine u krivičnom procesnom pravu Srbije, Novi Zakonik o krivičnom postupku iz 2011. godine. Pravni fakultet u Beogradu, Univerzitet u Beogradu.
Škulić, M., Bugarski, T. (2015). Krivično procesno pravo. Pravni fakultet u Novom Sadu, Univerzitet u Novom Sadu.
Ustav Republike Srbije, Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, br. 98/2006 i 115/2021.
Zakonik o krivičnom postupku Republike Srbije, Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, br. 72/2011, 101/2011, 121/2012, 32/2013, 45/2013, 55/2014, 35/2019, 27/2021 - odluka US i 62/2021 - odluka US.
Zakon o policiji Republike Srbije, Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije, br. 6/2016, 24/2018 i 87/2018.
Živanović, K. (2020). Zlostavljanje, mučenje i iznuđivanje iskaza osumnjičenog u krivičnom zakonodavstvu Republike Srbije. Bezbednost, vol. 62, br. 1, pp. 157-173.
Živanović, K. (2018). Posebna dokazna radnja tajnog nadzora komunikacije: praksa Evropskog suda za ljudska prava u slučaju neobrazložene naredbe suda. NBP. Nauka, bezbednost, policija, vol. 23, br. 3, pp. 287-310.
Worrall, J. (2009). Criminal Procedure – From First Contact to Appeal. United States: Allyn & Bacon.
Published
2024/06/26
Section
Original Scientific Papers