The Right to Remain Silent in Criminal Trial

Author:Gianina Anemona Radu
Position:Senior Lecturer PhD, Police Academy 'Al. I. Cuza
Pages:90-96
SUMMARY

A person's right not to incriminate oneself or to remain silent and not contribute to their own incrimination is a basic requirement of due process, although the right not to testify against oneself is not expressly guaranteed... (see full summary)

 
FREE EXCERPT
European Integration -
Realities a
90
The Right to
Abstract:
A person's right not t o i
incrimination is a bas ic requiremen
expressly guaranteed.
This legal righ
abusive coerc ion. The scope of the
Convention, and thus susceptible or
guarantee to a fair
trial. The Europea
Convention does not expressly ment
their own incrimination (
nemo tenetu
that are in consistence with the noti o
person charged with a crime is free
Therefore, the right to silence involv
accused/ defendant not to incrimina
the production of evidence and ca
evidence. Obligation to testify agai
coercion constitutes an interference w
be necessary in a democratic s ociety
First of all, the statutory pro vision i
Anglo-
Saxon countries and are to
Procedure Code, which observes
traditionally adopt
scholars and practitioners from the fo
Keywords: self-
incrimination; silenc
A person's right n
ot to incriminat
incrimination is a basic requirement
not expressly guaranteed.
This legal
authorities’ abusive coercion. The s
matter under the Convention, and thu
types of crimes
as a guarantee to a f
that art. 6 paragraph 2 of the Conv
oneself and the right not to contribu
these are generally r ecognized intern
stipulated in art. 6.
By virtue of the
the quest
ions or not, as he/she believ
not only the right not to testify aga
incriminate oneself. Thus, the accus
evidence and cannot be sanctioned fo
1
Senior Lecturer PhD, Police Academy “
021/317.55.23, fax. 021/317.55.17.
Correspo
es and Perspectives
t to Remain Silent in Criminal Trial
Gianina Anemona Radu
1
o i ncriminate oneself
or to remain silent and not contribute to
ent of due proc ess, although the right n ot to tes tify against ones
ight is intended to protect the accused/ the d efendant agai
nst the a
he r ight not t o incriminate oneself is related to criminal matter
or applicable to criminal proceedings concerning all types of cr
pean Court of Justice ruled that despite t he fact that art. 6 paragrap
ention the right not to incriminate oneself and the right not to con
netur are ipsum a c
cusare
) these are generally recognized internati
otion of “fair trial” stipulated in art . 6.
By virtue of the right to si
ee to answer the questions or not, as he/she be
lieves it is in his/he
olves not only the right not to testify against oneself, but also the r
inate oneself. Thus, the accused/defendant cannot be compelled t
cannot be sanctioned for failing to provide certain documents
gainst personal will, under the constraint of a fine or any othe
e with t
he negative aspect of the right to freedom of expression w
iety.
It is essential to clarify c ertain issues as far as this right is c
n in ques tion is specific to
adversarial systems
, which ar e found
totally different from that underlying t he current Romanian
s the t radition of
continental trial systems
. This type of s y
ry and it underlies the entire judicial doctrine and practice endors
e foundation of the modern state to date.
ence; right; accusation; testimony
nate oneself or to remain silent and not contribute
ent of due process, although the right not to testify aga
gal right is i ntended to protect the ac
cused/ the defend
e scope of the right not to incriminate oneself is relat
thus susceptible or applicable to criminal proceedings
a fair trial. The European Court of Justice ruled that d
onvention does not expressly mention the right not
ibute to their own incrimination (
nemo tenetur are ip
ternational rules that are in consistence with the notion
he right to silence, the person charged with a crime is
lieves it is in his/her interest. Therefore, the right to si
against oneself, but also the right of the accused/ de
cused/defendant cann
ot be compelled to assist in the
d for failing to provide certain documents or other evid
y “Al. I. Cuza”, Address: Aleea Privig hetorilor Street, no. 1
-
3
sponding author:
gianina_anemona@yahoo.com.
2013
to their own
neself is not
e authorities’
ter under the
crimes as a
raph 2 of the
contribute to
ational rules
silence, the
/her interest.
e right of the
d to assist
in
nts or other
ther form of
which must
s concerned.
nd mainly i n
an Criminal
system was
orsed by our
ute to their own
against oneself is
ndant against the
lated to criminal
gs concerning all
t despite the fact
ot to incriminate
ipsum accusare
)
ion of “fair trial”
is free to answer
silence involves
defendant not to
he production of
vidence.
3, Bucharest
. Tel.

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL