Zinchenko V. The interrelation between the sufficiency of evidences and standards of proof in criminal proceedings

DOI: 10.33098/2078-6670.2019.7.19. 122-128

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to determine interrelation of the sufficiency of evidences and standards of proof in criminal proceedings. Methodology. The methodology is an implementation of a comprehensive analysis of theoretical approaches to the definition of the concept of standards of proof, the definition of the content of certain of them and the formulation on this basis of relevant conclusions regarding their interrelation with the sufficiency of evidences. During research such methods of scientific knowledge were used: system-structural, structural-functional, formally legal. Results. In process of research the concept of sufficiency of evidences in criminal proceedings is defined. Approaches to the definition of standards of proof expressed in the doctrine of the criminal process are characterized and the author’s approach to understanding of their concept is formed. Based on doctrinal approaches, the content of the standards of proof «reasonable suspicion», «sufficient reason» and «beyond reasonable doubt» is defined. The interrelation between each of the specified standards of proof with the sufficiency of evidences as their system procedural property is established. Originality. In process of research, taking into account the theoretical approaches of domestic scientists, the content of the standards of proof «reasonable suspicion», «sufficient reason» and «beyond reasonable doubt» is comprehensively investigated and their interrelation with the sufficiency of evidences is established. Practical significance. The results of the research can be used in research work for further development of the problems of establishing the sufficiency of evidences in the context of the application of the standards of proof and in the educational process in the course of conducting various types of training in the relevant disciplines.

Key words: assessment of evidences, sufficiency of evidences, standards of proof, reasonable suspicion, sufficient grounds, beyond reasonable doubt.

References

1. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy vid 13.04.2012 r. № 4651-VI. URL: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4651-17.

2. Sliusarchuk Kh.R. Standarty dokazuvannia u kryminalnomu provadzhenni: avtoref. dys. … kand. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.09. Lviv, 2017. 24 s.

3. Kret H.R. Poniattia y oznaky standartiv dokazuvannia v doktryni kryminalnoho protsesu. Visegrad journal on human rights. 2018. № 6. Vol. 2. P. 133-138.

4. Hloviuk I.V., Stepanenko A.S. Standart dokazuvannia «obgruntovana pidozra» u kryminalnomu provadzhenni. Pravova pozytsiia. 2018. № 1. S. 13-20.

5. Melekh L.V. Pravova kharakterystyka instytutu dokaziv i dokazuvannia zakordonnykh krain. Visnyk Luhanskoho derzhavnoho universytetu vnutrishnikh sprav imeni E. O. Didorenka. 2016. Vyp. 1. S. 252-261.

6. Vapniarchuk V.V. Teoriia i praktyka kryminalnoho protsesualnoho dokazuvannia: monohrafiia. Kh.: Yurait, 2017. 408 s.

7. Lytvyn O.V. Kryminalne protsesualne dokazuvannia u stadii sudovoho rozghliadu: dys. … kand. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.09. Odesa, 2015. 214 s.

8. Sliusarchuk Kh.R. Standart dokazuvannia «obgruntovana pidozra» u kryminalnomu provadzhenni. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Seriia Pravo. 2017. Vyp. 42. S. 238-241.

9. Pavlyshyn A.A., Sliusarchuk Kh.R. Standart dokazuvannia «dostatnia pidstava»: tlumachennia Verkhovnoho Sudu SShA ta natsionalna praktyka zastosuvannia. Pravova pozytsiia. 2018. № 1. S. 103-110.

10. Kret H.R. Implementatsiia standartu dokazuvannia «poza rozumnym sumnivom» u kryminalne protsesualne zakonodavstvo Ukrainy i praktyku natsionalnykh sudiv. Pravo i suspilstvo.  2019.  № 2-1. – S. 215-220.