Garantias legais contra confissões criminais coagidas na Polônia e na Rússia

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v6i3.368

Palavras-chave:

processo penal, direito ao justo processo, confissões criminais, coerção policial, admissibilidade da prova.

Resumo

A confissão criminal é uma prova poderosa e altamente incriminadora. Uma confissão autoincriminatória autêntica pode ser uma fonte produtiva de novas provas conhecidas apenas pelo verdadeiro autor do crime. Ela também ajuda a acusação a construir um caso mais forte contra o réu em uma situação em que apenas indícios estão disponíveis. Em alguns casos, como homicídios sem localização do corpo e incêndios criminosos em terras selvagens, é difícil provar a participação e a culpa do réu sem o seu consentimento e total cooperação. Tudo isso explica por que, na era das técnicas forenses avançadas, os investigadores buscam obter confissões usando uma variedade de estratégias. Estudos mostram, entretanto, que algumas técnicas de interrogatório têm maior probabilidade de induzir falsas confissões, o que, por sua vez, potencializa o risco de erros judiciais. Do ponto de vista dos direitos humanos, o Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos expressou sérias preocupações sobre o uso de provas obtidas por meio de violência, coerção ou tortura, mas não estabeleceu um equilíbrio entre a aplicação eficaz da lei penal e a proteção adequada dos direitos individuais. Neste artigo, analisam-se as disposições legais contra a compulsão policial imprópria na Polônia e na Rússia. Afirma-se que cada país adota uma perspectiva diferente sobre a questão da coerção policial. Na Rússia, a lei fornece regras específicas sobre a admissibilidade de confissões criminais, seu valor probatório e métodos de verificação da confiabilidade do depoimento do suspeito. Na Polônia, a lei confere aos tribunais nacionais uma maior discricionariedade quanto ao modo de lidar com a confissão e as alegações em relação à utilização de técnicas de interrogatório coercivas. Com base nos resultados da análise de dispositivos legais pertinentes, jurisprudência e revisão bibliográfica, nesta pesquisa busca-se determinar a eficácia de dois modelos jurídicos na prevenção e tratamento de confissões penais coagidas. Em sede proporsitica, alterações foram sugeridas para abordar a questão do formalismo judicial excessivo em relação às alegações sobre o uso de técnicas de interrogatório ilegais.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Métricas

Carregando Métricas ...

Biografia do Autor

Denis Solodov, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn

PhD with habilitation, associate professor. Department of Criminology and Criminalistics, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland.

Ilia Solodov, Voronezh Bar Association, Russian Federation

PhD, advocate, Voronezh Bar Association, Russian Federation.

Referências

Commission report on monitoring the application of EU law. Available at: < https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2019-commission-report-monitoring-application-eu-law_en >. Accessed on: September 10, 2020.

Appeal of the Polish Ombudsman regarding Article 168a CCP. Available at: < https://www.rpo.gov.pl/sites/default/files/Wniosek%20do%20TK%20owoce%20zatrutego%20drzewa%20art%20art.%20168a%20%20KPK%206.05.2016.pdf >. Access on: Septem-ber 10, 2020.

BAEV, O.; SOLODOV, D. Proizvodstvo sledstvennyh dejstvij: kriminalisticheskij analiz UPK Rossii, praktika, rekomendacii. Moscow: Eksmo, 2010.

BALAKSHIN, V.S. Priznanie dokazatel'stv, poluchennyh s narusheniem trebovanij ugolovno-processual'nogo zakona, nedopustimymi i iskljuchenie ih iz ugolovnogo dela. Rossijskij sud'ja, n. 1, p. 38 – 45, 2018.

BŁOŃSKI, M. Przeprowadzanie na rozprawie dowodów uzyskanych w ramach czynności operacyjno-rozpoznawczych. Prokuratura i prawo, n. 9, p.78-92, 2017.

BRZOZOWSKI, Sebastian. Dopuszczalność dowodu w kontekście regulacji art. 168a k.p.k. Przegląd Sądowy, n. 10, p. 60-74, 2016.

CHEBOTAREVA, I.N. Otkaz podozrevaemogo, obvinjaemogo ot naznachennogo zashhitnika: pravovye pozicii Konstitucionnogo Suda RF. Advokatskaja praktika, n. 6, p. 27 – 35, 2019.

Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Poland of 6 June 1997. Available at: <https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU19970890555/U/D19970555Lj.pdf>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation of 18 December 18 2001. Available at: <https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_34481/>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 1984, Available at: < https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1987/06/19870626%2002-38%20AM/Ch_IV_9p.pdf >. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings. Available at: <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016L0343>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Directive (EU) 2016/800 of 11 May 2016 on procedural safeguards for children who are sus-pects or accused persons in criminal proceedings, Available at: < https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016L0800>. Access on: Septem-ber 10, 2020.

Directive 2012/13/EU of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings. Available at: < https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32012L0013>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Directive 2013/48/EU of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal pro-ceedings. Available at: <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32013L0048 >. Access on: September 10, 2020.

DZHABIROV, A. Bezmolvnoe priznanie, ili Molchat mozno po-raznomu. Ez Jurist, n. 13, p. 6-11, 2016.

EECHAUDT, V., CLAEYS, J., BEKEN, T. V.; CIUFFOLETTI, S.; HUGUES DE SURE-MAIN, RANAL, D. Research project EUPRETRIALRIGHTS Improving the protection of fundamental rights and access to legal aid for remand prisoners in the European Union. Analysis of European law as regard to access of detained persons to the law and to court. Available at: <https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8625571/file/8625572>. Access on: Sep-tember 10, 2020.

European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, Available at: <https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Analysis of statistics 2019. Available at: < https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Stats_analysis_2019_ENG.pdf/> . Access on: Sep-tember 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights Right to a fair trial (criminal limb). Updated on 30 April 2020, p. 75. Available at: <https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_6_criminal_ENG.pdf >. Access on: Sep-tember 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Right to a fair trial (criminal limb). Updated on 30 April 2020, p. 36. Available at: <https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_6_criminal_ENG.pdf>. Access on: Sep-tember 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights Right to a fair trial (criminal limb). Updated on 30 April 2020, p. 38-39. Available at: <https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_6_criminal_ENG.pdf>. Access on: Sep-tember 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Judgement in the case of Affaire Urazbayev v. Russia of 8 October 2019. Application no. 13128/06. Available at: <http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-196408>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Judgement in the case of case of Almaši v. Serbia of 8 Oc-tober 2019. Application no. 21388/15. Available at: <http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-196417>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Judgement in the case of El Haski v. Belgium of 25 Sep-tember 2012. Application no. 649/08. Available at: <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-113445%22]}>. Access on: Sep-tember 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Judgement in the case of Ibrahim and others v. the United Kingdom of 16 December 2014. Applications nos. 50541/08, 50571/08, 50573/08 and 40351/09. Available at: < http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-148676>. Access on: Septem-ber 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Judgement of the Grand Chamber in the case of John Mur-ray v. the United Kingdom of 8 February 1996. Application no. 18731/91. Available at: <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22dmdocnumber%22:[%22695857%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-57980%22]}>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Judgement of the Grand Chamber in the case of Gäfgen v. Germany of 1 June 2010. Application no. 22978/05. Available at: < https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/tur#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-99015%22]} >. Access on: September 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Judgement of the Grand Chamber in the case of Simeonovi v. Bulgaria of 12 May 2017. Application no. 21980/04. Available at: < http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-172963>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

European Court of Human Rights. Judgement of the Grand Chamber in the case of Beuze v. Belgium of 9 November 2018. Application no. 71409/10. Available at: < http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-187802>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

FRANCIFOROVA, S. Ju. Pravovye garantii dejatel'nosti advokata v ugolovnom sudopro-izvodstve. Advokatskaja praktika, n. 5, p. 14 – 18, 2019.

GABERLE, A. Dowody w sądowym procesie karnym, Kraków: Wolters Kluwer, 2007.

GORA, Ł. Aksjologia procesowa a dopuszczalność dowodu z art. 168a k.p.k. Państwo i Pra-wo, n. 10, p. 131-132, 2018.

Governmental Decree on the fees paid to legal aid lawyers of December 1, 2012. Available at: <https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_138571/ >. Access on: September 10, 2020.

GRUZA, Ewa; GOC, Mieczysław, MOSZCZYNSKI, Jarosław. Kryminalistyka, czyli o współczesnych metodach dowodzenia przestępstw. Zagadnienia prawne. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2020.

GUDJONSSON, Gisli H. The Psychology of Interrogations and Confessions: A handbook. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2003.

GUDJONSSON, Gisli H.; PEARSE, John. Suspect Interviews and False Confessions. Cur-rent Directions in Psychological Science, v. 20, n. 1, p. 33-37, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0963721410396824

Guidelines of the Russian Supreme Court concerning the application of the provisions of the Russian Constitution of March 3, 2004. Available at: <http://www.constitution.ru/decisions/10003328/10003328.htm>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

HO, H.L. The Fair Trial Rationale for Excluding Wrongfully Obtained Evidence. In: GLESS S., RICHTER T. (editors). Do Exclusionary Rules Ensure a Fair Trial? Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, v. 74, p. 283-305, 2019.

HODGSON, J. The Challenge of Universal Norms: Securing Effective Defence Rights Across Different Jurisdictions and Legal Cultures. Journal of Law and Society, 46, p. 95-114, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12185

Human Rights Watch. A persistent pattern of torture and ill-treatment. Available at: < https://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/russia/Russ99o-04.htm>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Human Rights Watch. World Report 2020, Available at: <https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/world_report_download/hrw_world_report_2020_0.pdf>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

ISAENKO, V.N. Voprosy dopustimosti dokazatel'stv v materialah sudebnoj praktyki. Ugolov-noe prawo, n. 5, p. 113 – 120, 2017.

JASIŃSKI, W. Racjonalna regulacja karnoprocesowej dopuszczalności dowodów uzyskanych z naruszeniem praw jednostki. Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, n. 3978, p. 83-95, 2020. https://doi.org/10.19195/0137-1134.120.54

JASIŃSKI, W. Rozdział 26. Zasady wykorzystywania dowodów. In: HOFMAŃSKI, P., SKORUPKA J. (editors). System Prawa Karnego Procesowego. Tom VIII: Dowody. Part 2, Warszawa: LexisNexis, p. 2668-2669, 2019.

Judgement of the Appellate Court in Gdansk of 22 June 2016 in the case no. II AKa 150/16. Available at: < https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/ii-aka-150-16-ustalanie-przez-sad-prawidlowosci-522177843>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Judgement of the Appellate Court in Poznan of 17 June 2014 in the case no. II AKa 107/14. Available at: <https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/ii-aka-107-14-prowadzenie-przed-przesluchaniem-rozmowy-521587565 >. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Judgement of the Appellate Court in Warsaw of 9 October 2017 in the case no. II AKa 310/17. Available at: <https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/ii-aka-310-17-wplywanie-na-wypowiedzi-osoby-522498318>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Judgement of the District Court in Czestochowa of 8 May 2019 in the case no. VII Ka 58/19. Available at: < https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/vii-ka-58-19-wyrok-sadu-okregowego-w-czestochowie-522761214>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Judgement of the Polish Supreme Court of 26 June 2019 in the case no. IV KK 328/18. Avail-able at: <http://www.sn.pl/sites/orzecznictwo/Orzeczenia3/IV%20KK%20328-18.pdf>. Ac-cess on: September 10, 2020.

Judgement of the Polish Supreme Court of 27 June 2017 in the case no. II KK 82/17. Available at: <https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/ii-kk-82-17-podstawy-kasacji-rzecznika-praw-522431726>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Judgement of the Polish Supreme Court of 9 October 2019 in the case no. II KK 500/18. Available at: < https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/v-kk-500-18-postanowienie-sadu-najwyzszego-523102815>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

Judgement of the Russian Supreme Court of 6 March 2016 in the case no. 70-О12-3. Available at: <http://base.garant.ru/70310476/> . Access on: September 10, 2020.

Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Statistical data on the courts’ decisions in 2019. Available at: < https://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/russia/Russ99o-04.htm>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

KARJAKIN, E.A. Asimmetrija pravil o dopustimosti dokazatel'stv v ugolovnom sudopro-izvodstve kak forma realizacii polozhenija o blagoprijatstvovanii zashhite. Rossijskaja jus-ticija, n. 9, p. 33 – 36, 2017.

KASSIN, S. M.; DRIZIN, S. A.; GRISSO, T.; GUDJONSSON, G. H.; LEO, R. A.; RED-LICH, A. D. Police-Induced Confessions: Risk Factors and Recommendations. Law and Human Behaviour, n. 34, p. 16-19, 2010.

KASSIN, Saul M.; GUDJONSSON, Gisli H. The Psychology of Confessions: A Review of the Literature and Issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, v. 5, n. 2, p. 33-67, 2004.

KMIECIK, R. Zakazy dowodowe – pojęcie i ich klasyfikacja. Skutki procesowe naruszenia zakazów, reguł i gwarancji procesowych w postępowaniu dowodowym. In: KMIECIK, R.(editor). Prawo dowodowe. Zarys wykładu, Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer, 2008.

KORNAKOVA, S. V. Nekotorye suzhdenija o nesovershenstve norm upk rf, kasajushhihsja priznanija viny obvinjaemym. Sibirskie ugolovno-processual'nye i kriminalisticheskie chte-nija, n. 4 (26), p. 110-118, 2019.

KUCHARCZYK, Mariusz. Zakaz substytuowania dowodu z wyjaśnień oskarżonego treścią pism, zapisków i notatek urzędowych. Prokuratura i Prawo, n. 5, p. 137-148, 2005.

KULESZA, C. Rozdział 10. Obrońca. In: KULESZA, C. (editor). Tom VI: Strony i inni uczestnicy postępowania karnego. In: HOFMAŃSKI, P. (editor). System Prawa karnego procesowego, Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, p. 862-975, 2016.

KURCHENKO, V. N. Obespecenie obvinaemomu prava na zasitu: interpretacia v sudebnoj praktike. Ugolovnoe parvo, n. 1, p. 89-95, 2019.

LEO, R. Police Interrogations, False Confessions, and Alleged Child Abuse Cases. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, n. 50, p. 693-721, 2017.

LIPIŃSKI, Konrad. Klauzula uadekwatniająca przesłanki niedopuszczalności dowodu w postę-powaniu karnym (art. 168a k.p.k.). Prokuratura i prawo, n. 11, p. 44-59, 2016.

MCCONVILLE, Michael; BALDWIN, John. The role of interrogation in crime discovery and conviction. The British Journal of Criminology, v. 22, n. 2, p. 165 -175, 1982. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a047296

MOSCATELLI, Lívia Yuen Ngan. Considerações sobre a confssão e o método Reid aplicado na investgação criminal. Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal, v. 6, n. 1, p. 361-394, 2020. https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v6i1.331

NAUMOV, K.A. Novyj shag zakonodatelja: povysitsja li jeffektivnost' sudebnogo kontrolja i prokurorskogo nadzora? Zakonnost', n. 4, p. 41 – 47, 2017.

Overview of the jurisprudence of the Russian Supreme Court of 2018, Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, n. 1, 2019.

RASSIN, Eric; ISRAËLS, Han. False confessions in the lab: a review. Erasmus Law Review, v. 7, n. 4, p. 219-224, 2014.

RUDICH, V.V., Standarty dopustimosti dokazatel'stv po ugolovnym delam, vyrabotannye v reshenijah Evropejskogo suda po pravam cheloveka. Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnaja justicija, n. 5, p. 9 – 12, 2017.

RUSINEK, M. Rozdział 25. Zakazy odnoszące się do sposobu dowodzenia. In: Skorupka, J (editor). System Prawa Karnego Procesowego. Tom VIII. Część 2: Dowody. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, p. 1982–1995, 2019.

RUSSANO, Melissa B.; MEISSNER, Christian A.; NARCHET, Fadia M.; KASSIN, Saul M. Investigating True and False Confessions Within a Novel Experimental Paradigm. Psycho-logical Science, n. 16(6), p. 481-486, 2015.

SEREDNEV, V. A. K voprosu nekotoryh pričin profanacii advokatskoj deatelnosti v otecestvennom ugolovnom processe. Advokatskaa praktika, n. 3, p. 39-44, 2019.

SKORUPKA, J. Prokonstytucyjna wykładnia przepisów prawa dowodowego w procesie kar-nym. In: GRZEGORCZYK, T.; OLSZEWSKI R. (editors). Verba volant, scripta manent. Proces karny, prawo karne skarbowe i prawo wykroczeń po zmianach z lat 2015-2016. Księga pamiątkowa poświęcona Profesor Monice Zbrojewskiej, Warszawa: Wolters Klu-wer, p. 351-364, 2016.

SKORUPKA, J. Wykorzystanie w postępowaniu karnym dowodów bezpośrednio i pośrednio legalnych. In: GODYŃ, J.; HUDZIK, M.; PAPRZYCKI, L. K. (editors). Zagadnienia prawa dowodowego. Warszawa: Sąd Najwyższy, p. 29-30, 2011.

SOLOVIEVA, N. A.; PEREKRESTOV, V. N. Dokazatelstvennaâ funkcia priznania. Ros-sijskaa usticia, n. 11, p. 13-18, 2008.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. Available at: <https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/>. Access on: September 10, 2020.

WĄSEK-WIADEREK, Małgorzata. Przegląd orzecznictwa Europejskiego dotyczącego spraw karnych. Zeszyt, n. 1-2, p.21, 2010.

ŻBIKOWSKA, M. Dowód pośrednio nielegalny w polskim procesie karnym. Wojskowy Prze-gląd Prawniczy, n.1-2, p. 108-124, 2012.

Publicado

27.10.2020

Como Citar

Solodov, D., & Solodov, I. (2020). Garantias legais contra confissões criminais coagidas na Polônia e na Rússia. Revista Brasileira De Direito Processual Penal, 6(3), 1661–1698. https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v6i3.368

Edição

Seção

Teoria da Prova Penal