The standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respect

In democratic countries, the presumption of innocence is one of the pillars of criminal justice, a symbol of respect of the person as the highest social value. It is a fundamental principle of criminal justice, the important warranty of human rights and freedom. The presumption of innocence is one...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Dace Radzeviča
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Latvia Press 2022-09-01
Series:Law: Journal of the University of Latvia
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journal.lu.lv/jull/article/view/241
_version_ 1797991842380251136
author Dace Radzeviča
author_facet Dace Radzeviča
author_sort Dace Radzeviča
collection DOAJ
description In democratic countries, the presumption of innocence is one of the pillars of criminal justice, a symbol of respect of the person as the highest social value. It is a fundamental principle of criminal justice, the important warranty of human rights and freedom. The presumption of innocence is one of the fundamental principles of a fair trial. However, the Criminal procedure law allows departure from the presumption of innocence, prescribing the legal presumption of the fact. This means that the burden of proof lies not on the prosecutor, but on the accused in cases prescribed by law thus facilitating the burden of proof of the prosecutor. From early times, those who prized freedom have required a strong justification for condemning a defendant and depriving him of either his life or liberty. The law demands a higher burden of persuasion in criminal than in civil trials because the potential loss is so much greater in criminal than in civil trials, the risk of error must accordingly be reduced. It should be noted that the standard of proof for the State and the standard of proof for the accused is different. Accordingly, the standard of proof for the State is “to avoid any reasonable doubt” but standard of proof for the accused is “creation of reasonable doubt”. The standard of proof for the State is higher than the standard of proof for the accused because the prosecutor in the process of trial must exclude any reasonable doubt, while for the accused is sufficient to create a reasonable doubt regarding the fact for disapproving the legal presumption of the fact. In the process of application of the legal presumption of the fact, it should be possible for the accused to disapprove the legal presumption of the fact, thus creating a reasonable doubt for the court, it is not allowed to restrict the right of defense, and must provide the legal obligation to verify the proof in order to ensure the right to a fair trial. The necessity of the legal presumption of the fact must be justified and it must be reasonable.
first_indexed 2024-04-11T08:58:28Z
format Article
id doaj.art-8a35de59617f41a484310c179473d7de
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1691-7677
2592-9364
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-11T08:58:28Z
publishDate 2022-09-01
publisher University of Latvia Press
record_format Article
series Law: Journal of the University of Latvia
spelling doaj.art-8a35de59617f41a484310c179473d7de2022-12-22T04:33:04ZengUniversity of Latvia PressLaw: Journal of the University of Latvia1691-76772592-93642022-09-014The standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respectDace Radzeviča 0University of Latvia In democratic countries, the presumption of innocence is one of the pillars of criminal justice, a symbol of respect of the person as the highest social value. It is a fundamental principle of criminal justice, the important warranty of human rights and freedom. The presumption of innocence is one of the fundamental principles of a fair trial. However, the Criminal procedure law allows departure from the presumption of innocence, prescribing the legal presumption of the fact. This means that the burden of proof lies not on the prosecutor, but on the accused in cases prescribed by law thus facilitating the burden of proof of the prosecutor. From early times, those who prized freedom have required a strong justification for condemning a defendant and depriving him of either his life or liberty. The law demands a higher burden of persuasion in criminal than in civil trials because the potential loss is so much greater in criminal than in civil trials, the risk of error must accordingly be reduced. It should be noted that the standard of proof for the State and the standard of proof for the accused is different. Accordingly, the standard of proof for the State is “to avoid any reasonable doubt” but standard of proof for the accused is “creation of reasonable doubt”. The standard of proof for the State is higher than the standard of proof for the accused because the prosecutor in the process of trial must exclude any reasonable doubt, while for the accused is sufficient to create a reasonable doubt regarding the fact for disapproving the legal presumption of the fact. In the process of application of the legal presumption of the fact, it should be possible for the accused to disapprove the legal presumption of the fact, thus creating a reasonable doubt for the court, it is not allowed to restrict the right of defense, and must provide the legal obligation to verify the proof in order to ensure the right to a fair trial. The necessity of the legal presumption of the fact must be justified and it must be reasonable. https://journal.lu.lv/jull/article/view/241The presumptions of innocencelegal presumption of the facttransfer the burden of proof
spellingShingle Dace Radzeviča
The standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respect
Law: Journal of the University of Latvia
The presumptions of innocence
legal presumption of the fact
transfer the burden of proof
title The standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respect
title_full The standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respect
title_fullStr The standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respect
title_full_unstemmed The standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respect
title_short The standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respect
title_sort standard of proof the fact of legal presumption of respect
topic The presumptions of innocence
legal presumption of the fact
transfer the burden of proof
url https://journal.lu.lv/jull/article/view/241
work_keys_str_mv AT daceradzevica thestandardofproofthefactoflegalpresumptionofrespect
AT daceradzevica standardofproofthefactoflegalpresumptionofrespect