Conflicting interests of witnesses and defendants in a fair criminal trial

can a hearing by videoconference be the best instrument to reconcile them?

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v8i3.737

Keywords:

hearing, accused, right to defence, witness, videoconference

Abstract

This study determined whether an adequately regulated hearing by videoconference can become (alone or in conjunction with other measures) an instrument to balance the protection of the rights of the accused with the protection of the interests of witnesses in the criminal process. The authors identified the requirements that a hearing by videoconference must meet the standards established by the European Court of Human Rights. They performed a critical analysis of the existing provisions relating to hearing in Polish criminal procedural law and the practice of their application and showed why in some situations, hearing by videoconference seems to be the most optimal form of hearing. Particular attention was paid to witnesses with specific needs for protection during a hearing. These considerations led the authors to the general (i.e., not exclusively applicable to the Polish legal order) conclusion that hearing by videoconference is a very useful instrument for realising fair trial standards and witness protection.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Arkadiusz Lach, Nicolaus Copernius Univeristy in Toruń
    Professor of criminal procedure, Head of Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics at the Faculty of Law and Administration, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń (Poland). He specializes in criminal procedure, legal aspects of cybercrime, human rights, and European criminal law.
  • Maja Klubińska, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
    PhD in Law, Assistant Professor at the Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics at the Faculty of Law and Administration, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń (Poland).
  • Renata Badowiec, Nicolaus Copernius Univeristy in Toruń
    PhD candidate, assistant at the Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics at the Faculty of Law and Administration, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń (Poland).

References

ARONSON, Elliot; WILSON, Timothy D.; AKERT, Robin M. Psychologia społeczna. Serce i umysł. Poznań: Polish translation by Zysk i S-ka Wydawnictwo s.c., 1994.

BERMANN, George A. Dispute Resolution in Pandemic Circumstances. In: PISTOR, Katharina (ed.). Law in the time of Covid-19. New York: Columbia Law School, 2020, pp. 167-174.

BROWN, Robert. Many Remote Lawyers Struggle to Read Body Language. Available in: <https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bloomberg-law-analysis/analysis-many-remote-lawyers-struggle-to-read-body-language>. Accessed on 26 June 2022.

BUDNIAK-ROGALA, Aleksandra. Przeprowadzenie dowodu za pomocą środków porozumiewania się na odległość na zasadzie art. 235 § 2 KPC a realizacja zasady bezpośredniości – uwagi w kontekście nowelizacji KPC z 10.7.2015 r. – część 2. Prawo Mediów Elektronicznych, no. 3, 2017, pp. 18-23.

CREED, Fabiola; BERMINGHAM, Rowena. Improving Witness Testimony. Houses of Parliment, Parliamentary Office of Science & Technology, POSTNOTE, 607, July, 2019, pp. 1-6.

DENAULT, Vincent; DUNBAR, Norah. Nonverbal communication in courtrooms: Scientific assessments or modern trials by ordeal? The Advocates’ Quarterly, 47(3), 2017, pp. 280-308.

DENAULT, Vincent; PATTERSON, Miles L. Justice and Nonverbal Communication in a Post-pandemic World: An Evidence-Based Commentary and Cautionary Statement for Lawyers and Judges. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 45:1–10, 2021, pp. 1 – 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-020-00339-x

ELLIOTT, Robin. Vulnerable and intimidated witnesses: A review of the literature. London: Home Office, 1998.

FEKETE, Gábor. Videoconferencing hearings after the times of pandemic. EU and Comparative Law Issues and Challenges Series (ECLIC), issue 5, 2021, pp. 468-486. https://doi.org/10.25234/eclic/18316

GABERLE, Andrzej. Dowody w sądowym procesie karnym. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer, 2007.

GORI, Pierpaolo; PAHLADSINGH, Aniel. Fundamental rights under Covid-19: an European perspective on videoconferencing in court. ERA Forum, vol. 21, 2021, pp. 561-577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-020-00643-5

HOFMAŃSKI, Piotr; SADZIK, Elżbieta; ZGRYZEK, KAZIMIERZ. Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz. T. I. Warszawa: C.H. Beck, 2007.

JAGIEŁŁO, Dariusz. Choroba psychiczna a świadek w procesie karnym (wybrane problemy na styku prawa i medycyny). Nowa Kodyfikacja Prawa Karnego, Volume LX, 2020, pp. 51-62. https://doi.org/10.19195/2084-5065.55.5

LACH, Arkadiusz. Przesłuchanie na odległość w postępowaniu karnym. Państwo i Prawo, no. 12, 2006, pp. 80-87.

LEGG, Michael; SONG, Anthony. The courts, the remote hearing and the pandemic: from action to reflection. UNSW Law Journal, Volume 44(1), 2021, pp. 126-166. https://doi.org/10.53637/ZATE4122

LONATI, Simone. Un invito a compiere una scelta di civiltà: la Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo rinunci all’uso della testimonianza anonima come prova decisiva su cui fondare una sentenza di condanna. Revista Brasileira De Direito Processual Penal, 5(1), 2019, pp. 341-388. https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v5i1.226

LOVE, Helene. Aging witnesses: Exploring difference, inspiring change. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, Vol. 19(4), 2015, pp. 210–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712715591462

ŁUKASIEWICZ, Anna. Zdalne sprawy karne nie będą masowe. Available in: <https://legalis.pl/zdalne-sprawy-karne-nie-beda-masowe>. Accessed on 17 September 2022.

MACKENZIE, John. The pros and cons of remote hearings. Available in: <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=a3ea7acf-1421-4683-8dfd-642d22cfa45f>. Accessed on 28 June 2022.

MAFFEI, Stefano. The European Right to Confrontation in Criminal Proceedings: Absent, Anonymous and Vulnerable Witnesses. Groningen: Europa Law Publishing, 2006.

MAZUR, Hubert. Przesłuchanie świadka na odległość. In: CZARNECKI, Paweł; CZERWIŃSKA, Małgorzata (ed.). Katalog dowodów w postępowaniu karnym. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck, 2014, pp. 157–168.

NATHANSON, Rebecca; SAYWITZ Karen J. The effects of the courtroom context on children's memory and anxiety. The Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 31/Spring, 2003, pp. 67-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/009318530303100105

PUDZIANOWSKA, Dorota (et. al.). Niepełnosprawność. In: PUDZIANOWSKA, Dorota; JAGURA, Jarosław (ed.). Równe traktowanie uczestników postępowań. Przewodnik dla sędziów i prokuratorów. Warszawa: Biuro Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich, 2016, pp. 18-46.

PUDZIANOWSKA, Dorota (et. al.). Wiek. In: PUDZIANOWSKA, Dorota; JAGURA, Jarosław (ed.). Równe traktowanie uczestników postępowań. Przewodnik dla sędziów i prokuratorów. Warszawa: Biuro Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich, 2016, pp. 64-88.

RISAN, Patrick. Accommodating trauma in police interviews. An exploration of rapport in investigative interviews of traumatized victims. University of Bergen, 2017.

ROSSNER, Meredith. Remote rituals in virtual courts. Journal of Law and Society, vol. 48, 2021, pp. 334–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12304

ROWDEN, Emma; WALLACE, Anne. Remote Judging: the impact of video links on the image and the role of the judge. International Journal of Law in Context, 14(4):504, December 2018, pp. 504-524. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552318000216

SAKOWICZ, Andrzej. Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 18 marca 2015 r., II KK 318/14. Białostockie Studia Prawnicze, z. 21, 2016, pp. 215-221. https://doi.org/10.15290/bsp.2016.21.16

SOMMERER, Lucia. Virtuelle Unmittelbarkeit? Videokonferenzen im Strafverfahren während und jenseits einer epidemischen Lage von nationaler Tragweite. ZSTW, 133(2), 2021, pp. 403-446. https://doi.org/10.1515/zstw-2021-0015

SYGIT-KOWALKOWSKA, Ewa. Zaburzenia zdrowia i stanu emocjonalnego osoby dorosłej dotkniętej przestępstwem a psychologiczna ocena osobowego źródła dowodowego. Studia Prawnoustrojowe, no. 39, 2018, pp. 297-310.

ŚWIECKI, Dariusz. Bezpośredniość czy pośredniość w polskim procesie karnym. Warszawa: LexisNexis, 2013.

ŚWIĘCICKA, Dagmara. Małoletni świadek w procesie karnym. Palestra, no. 11, 2021, pp. 7-20.

WILIŃSKI, Paweł. Przesłuchanie świadka na odległość w postępowaniu karnym. Przegląd Sądowy, no. 6, 2005, pp. 16-27.

ZNAMIEROWSKI, Jakub. Prawne i kryminalistyczne aspekty przesłuchania w postępowaniu karnym świadków z zaburzeniami psychicznymi. Przegląd Sądowy, no. 7-8, 2014, pp. 132-144.

Downloads

Published

2022-10-29

Issue

Section

DOSSIER: Testimonial evidence in criminal procedure

How to Cite

Lach, A. ., Klubińska, M., & Badowiec, R. . (2022). Conflicting interests of witnesses and defendants in a fair criminal trial: can a hearing by videoconference be the best instrument to reconcile them? . Brazilian Journal of Criminal Procedure, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v8i3.737