Admissibility of Evidence Obtained as a Result of Issuing an European Investigation Order in a Polish Criminal Trial
Hanna Kuczyńska
Institute of Law Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences , Polandhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1446-2244
Abstract
This article analyses the admissibility of evidence gathered by the Polish procedural authorities as a result of issuing an European Investigation Order, on the basis of provisions implemented due to the adoption on the 3th of April 2014 of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters. This Directive created a mechanism that allows for transfer of evidence between EU Member States. In this text the question will be answered how to deal with results of investigative measures that have been legally obtained in the executing state but despite acting in accordance with the legality principle by both states, happen to be illegal in the issuing Member State. Another discussed problem is how the rules of admissibility of evidence obtained from the result of issuing an EIO work in Poland – or at least how they should operate. The second discussed issue thus will refer to the current provisions in force in Poland regulating the method of dealing with evidence obtained abroad – that is also with evidence transferred from other Member States. It will be shown that they are unclear and may lead to undesirable results. In addition, suggested changes in Polish law will be proposed.
Keywords:
admissibility of evidence, evidence in criminal trial, European Investigative Order, Polish criminal trialReferences
Armada, Inés. “The European Investigation Order and the Lack of European Standards for Gathering Evidence: Is a Fundamental Rights-Based Refusal the Solution?.” New Journal of European Criminal Law, no. 1 (March 2015): 8–31.
Bachmaier Winter, Lorena. “European Investigation Order for obtaining evidence in the criminal proceedings. Study of the proposal for European Directive.” Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik. Accessed December 21, 2020. http://www.zis-online.com/dat/artikel/2010_9_490.pdf.
Barwina, Zbigniew. Zasada wzajemnego uznawania w sprawach karnych (The principle of mutual recognition in criminal matters). Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2012.
Benedict, Jerome. Le sort des preuves illegales dans le procés pénal. Lausanne: Editions Pro Schola, 1994.
Damaška, Mirjan. “Evidentiary barriers to conviction and two models of criminal procedure: a comparative study.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review, no. 121 (1973): 506–589.
Damaška, Mirjan. The Faces of Justice and State Authority: A Comparative Approach to the Legal Process. Yale: Yale University Press, 1996.
Daniele, Marcello. “Evidence Gathering in the Realm of the European Investigation Order: From National Rules to Global Principles.” New Journal of European Criminal Law, no. 1 (June 2015): 179–194.
Delmas-Marty, Mireille, and John. R. Spencer, eds. European Criminal Procedures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Garamvölgyi, Balázs, Katalin Ligeti, Anna Ondrejová, and Margarete von Galen. “Admissibility of Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in the EU.” Eucrim, no. 3 (2020): 201–208.
Gless, Sabine. “Mutual recognition, judicial inquires, due process and fundamental rights.” In European Evidence Warrant: Transnational Judicial Inquiries in the EU, edited by John A.E. Vervaele, 121–29. Antwerpen-Oxford: Intersentia, 2005.
Gruszecka, Dagmara. “W kwestii interpretacji znowelizowanego przepisu art. 168a (Regarding the interpretation of the revised provision of art. 168a).” Palestra, no. 1-2 (2017): 60–78.
Hannibal, Martin, and Lisa Mountford. The Law of Criminal and Civil Evidence. Principles and Practice. University of Staffordshire: Longman, 2002.
Hofmański, Piotr, Elżbieta Sadzik, and Kazimierz Zgryzek. Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz (Code of Criminal Procedure. Commentary). Warsaw: C.H. Beck, 2012.
Jaworski, Gwidon, and Aleksandra Sołtysińska. Postępowanie w sprawach karnych ze stosunków międzynarodowych. Komentarz (Criminal proceedings in international relations. Commentary). Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2010.
Jurka, Raimundas, and Jolanta Zajančkauskienė. “Movement of Evidence in the European Union: Challenges for the European Investigation Order.” Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, A Journal of Vytautas Magnus University, no. 2(9) (2016): 56–84.
Kern, Eduard, and Claus Roxin. Strafverfahrensrecht: ein Studienbuch. München: C.H. Beck Verlag, 1987.
Kleinknecht, Theodor. “Die Beweisverbote im Strafprozess.” Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, no. 19 (1966): 1537–1546.
Krysztofiuk, Grzegorz. “Europejski nakaz dochodzeniowy (European Investigation Order).” Prokuratura i Prawo, no. 2 (2012): 81–106.
Kuczyńska, Hanna. “Zagadnienia dopuszczalności materiału dowodowego w sprawach karnych na obszarze Unii Europejskiej (Issues of admissibility of evidence in criminal matters in the area of the European Union).” Przegląd Prawa Europejskiego i Międzynarodowego, no. 1(28) (2012): 23–52.
Kuczyńska, Hanna. “Commentary on Article 589x § 2 CCP.” In Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz (Code of Criminal Procedure. Commentary), edited by Jerzy Skorupka, 1578–1658. Warsaw: C.H. Beck, 2020.
Kusak, Martyna. Mutual admissibility of evidence in criminal matters in the EU. A study of telephone tapping and house search. Antwerpen–Apeldoorn–Portland: Maklu, 2016.
Kusak, Martyna. Dowody zagraniczne. Gromadzenie i dopuszczalność w polskim procesie karnym. Przewodnik z wzorami. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2019.
Kusak, Martyna. “Mutual admissibility of evidence and the European investigation order: aspirations lost in reality.” ERA Forum, no. 19 (2019): 391–400.
Lach, Arkadiusz. Europejska pomoc prawna w sprawach karnych (European mutual assistance in criminal matters). Toruń: TNOiK, 2007.
Murphy, Paul. Murphy on Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Nita-Światłowska, Barbara, and Andrzej Światłowski. “Odczytanie w postępowaniu karnym protokołu czynności dowodowej przeprowadzonej przed obcym organem (Incorporating in criminal proceedings official records taken before a foreign authority).” Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, no. 2 (2013): 4–11.
Płachta, Michał. “Komentarz do art. 578.” In Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz (Code of Criminal Procedure. Commentary), edited by Jan Grajewski, Lech K. Paprzycki, and Michał Płachta. Kraków: Zakamycze, 2003.
Rogall, Klaus. “Grundsatzfragen der Beweisverbote.” In Beweisverbote in Ländern der EU und vergleichbaren Rechtsordnungen, edited by Frank Höpfel, and Barbara Huber, 119–148. Freiburg in Breisgau: Edition Iuscrim, 1999.
Roberts, Paul, and Adrian Zuckerman. Criminal Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Ryan, Andrea. Towards a System of European Criminal Justice. The problem of admissibility of evidence. London and New York: Routledge, 2014.
Steinborn, Sławomir. “Komentarz do art. 589w.” In Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz (Code of Criminal Procedure. Commentary), Vol. II, edited by Jan Grajewski, Lech K. Paprzycki, and Sławomir Steinborn. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2010.
Thayer, James B. Preliminary Treatise on Evidence at the Common Law. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1898.
Waine, Lydia, Robert May, and Steven Powles. May on criminal evidence. U.K.: Sweet & Maxwel, 2015.
Institute of Law Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences
Dr. habil. Hanna Kuczyńska, Associate Professor, Institute of Law Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences; correspondence address: ul. Nowy Świat 72, 00-330 Warsaw, Poland; e-mail: hkuczynska@gmail.com; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1446-2244.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1446-2244
