Pomówienie w procesie karnym: pragmatyzm czy manipulacja?
Allegation in Criminal Proceedings: An Act of Pragmatics or of Manipulation?

Summary/Abstract: The allegation or, in more precise terms, any statements charging someone with fully admissible proof in the course of criminal proceedings, should be assessed by the judging authority on the same grounds as any other type of evidence. Undoubtedly, such assessment should be made with particular prudence as the criminal law system grants delators some far reaching privileges. They may be exemplified by the impunity granted to crown witnesses, which, in its essence, contradicts the principle of legality prescribing the absolute persecution of perpetrators. Another case may be the impunity of active bribers who have denounced the beneficiaries of the material benefits (bribes). The group of beneficiaries of the perpetrators cooperating with the law enforcement authorities covers also “small crown witnesses” who are granted the extraordinary mitigation of punishment in exchange for the cooperation with the prosecution. In their work, Polish courts tend to rely more and more often on the institution of the voluntary self-sentencing and sentencing without trail: it has been applied in ca. 50% of the cases examined by courts. These institutions undoubtedly facilitate the evidence proceedings and speed up the whole process. Seen from such perspective, they have a pragmatic value. However, they entail the risk of abuse by the law enforcement authorities detrimental to their obligation to establish the objective truth. As a result, in practice we see how the accused is put under a significant pressure in order to provide charging evidence in exchange for the mitigation of liability. The risk of pathology is very high: the cooperating perpetrator becomes the vehicle of the concept of accusation in exchange for the guarantee of impunity or of punishment alleviation.

• Details
• Contents