Ponowienie czynności dowodowej w polskim procesie karnym (aspekty teoretyczne i prakseologiczne)

Łukasz Cora


The text contains an analysis of the legal nature of the regulation of the institution of reopening evidentiary procedure. The views presented consider the institution of reopening the proceeding as a key act of control of the evidence, necessary from the point of view of the correctness of the findings made. The author assumes that limiting the admissibility of reopening proceedings to compliance with formal requirements of procedural law is insufficient. In his opinion, this issue should be identified with proportionality, truthfulness, suitability and effectiveness of the arrangements made as a result of its implementation, both from the point of view of achieving the actual and assumed process objectives. In conclusion, the author asserts that the performance of evidentiary proceedings should take into account the postulate of their legitimacy, completeness, precision and effectiveness for the evidentiary basis of the decision. The whole difficulty in the scope of reopening evidence proceedings lies in balancing goods in the form of limitation of discomfort (inconvenience) to the participants of criminal proceedings, speed of criminal proceedings and implementation of the principle of substantive truth, the principle of legal prosecution, the principle of free assessment of evidence and the postulate of an accurate reaction.
Author Łukasz Cora (FLA/DCPC)
Łukasz Cora,,
- Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics
Other language title versionsReopening of evidentiary proceedings under Polish criminal law (theoretical and praxeological aspects)
Journal seriesRuch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny, [Journal of law, Economics and Sociology], ISSN 0035-9629, (B 11 pkt)
Issue year2018
Publication size in sheets0.70
Keywords in Englishevidentiarity proceedings, evidence, criminal procedure, admissibility
URL https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/rpeis/article/view/17225
Languagepl polski
LicenseOther; published final; Other open licence; with publication
Score (nominal)11
ScoreMinisterial score = 11.0, ArticleFromJournal
Ministerial score (2013-2016) = 11.0, ArticleFromJournal
Citation count*
Share Share

Get link to the record

* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.
Are you sure?