The tactics of talking the statement of the protected witness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55516/ijlso.v3i1.169Keywords:
witness hearing, protected witness, anonymous witness, forensic tactics, forensic investigations, criminal trialAbstract
The article introduces the main forensic tactical rules applicable to the evidentiary procedure of listening to protected witnesses during the criminal trial, through an aggregate analysis of the forensic procedures with the relevant legal norms, as well as with references to national and international jurisprudential solutions, and finally brief conclusions are expressed and Ferenda law proposals to improve the legislative framework and forensic methods in the field.
References
Resolution of the European Parliament of October 23, 2013 regarding the protection of witnesses in the fight against international organized crime (OJ 2016/C 208/09);
Recommendation (1997)13 regarding witness intimidation and defense rights;
Recommendation (2005)9 regarding the protection of witnesses and justice collaborators;
Framework Decision 2002/475/JAI on combating terrorism;
The Council's framework decision regarding the position of victims in the criminal process;
The framework decision of the Council of Europe on the protection of witnesses in the fight against international crime of 23.11.2005;
E. Stancu, Treatise on Criminalistics, 6th edition, revised, Universul Juridic, Bucharest, 2015;
The Criminal Procedure Code, adopted by Law no. 135/2010, published in the Official Gazette no. 486 of July 15, 2010, with subsequent amendments;
Law no. 682/2002, published in the Official Gazette no. 964 of December 28, 2002, with subsequent amendments;
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, ratified by Romania through Law 30/1994, published in M.Of. no. 135 of May 31, 1994;
Guide regarding art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, published on the website https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Guide_Art _6_RON, accessed on 6.11.2023;
ECtHR, judgment in Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. United Kingdom (MC), no. 26.766/05 and 22.228/06, ECHR Collection 2011;
ECtHR, judgment of 28 February 2006 in the Case of Krasniki v. Czech Republic, no. 51277/99, accessible on the website www.ier.ro;
ECtHR, judgment of 14 February 2002 in the Case of Visser v. the Netherlands, no. 26668/95, accessible on the website www.ier.ro;
ECtHR, Kostovski judgment against the Netherlands, accessible on the website www.ier.ro;
ECtHR, Judgment of 26 March 1996 in the case of Doorson v. The Netherlands, Collection of Decisions and Judgments ECtHR 1996/II;
ECHR, Bulfinski case against Romania, published in M. Of. no. 21 of January 10, 2011;
The Constitutional Court of Romania, decision no. 48 of February 28, 2023, published in the Official Gazette no. 625 of July 10, 2023.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 International Journal of Legal and Social Order
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
