Abstract

Modern technology has provided us with unlimited possibilities for audio and visual recording, which can, unfortunately, also be used for the violation of human rights and freedoms. With the agreement of involved parties, the use of the recording is likely to be uncontroversial. However, complex issues arise when the recording is covert, and when the recording party wants to rely upon the recording, or the transcript of it, to prove an illegal act in court proceedings. The question arises as to how to strike a balance between the need to protect security and investigate the truth and the need to protect the right to privacy and the personal sphere. Particularly interesting legal issues are those that concern the justification and the permissibility of the use of illegal or covert recordings in the capacity of evidence in criminal proceedings. Bearing in mind the above, the paper is devoted to the analysis of legislation concerning protection of privacy and the legislation on the subject of illegal evidence in criminal proceedings. This issue is especially interesting due to the fact that Serbian criminal law accepts the theory of "the fruits of the poisonous tree", which means that the criteria for the evaluation of the validity of the evidence are particularly strict. In that context, the normative, axiological and comparative law method has been used to analyse the subject matter. The author has also referred to the comparative law and to the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The aim of the paper is to point out to the certain ambiguities in Serbian positive law, in order to develop appropriate recommendations for the practical use and for the improvement of normative solutions.

Highlights

  • PRIVATNO SNIMLJENI SADRŽAJI KAO DOKAZApstrakt: U savremeno doba tehnologija daje neograničene mogućnosti za beleženja zvučnih i vizuelnih zapisa, ali i za kršenje ljudskih prava i sloboda

  • Modern technology has provided us with unlimited possibilities

  • when the recording party wants to rely upon the recording

Read more

Summary

PRIVATNO SNIMLJENI SADRŽAJI KAO DOKAZ

Apstrakt: U savremeno doba tehnologija daje neograničene mogućnosti za beleženja zvučnih i vizuelnih zapisa, ali i za kršenje ljudskih prava i sloboda. Kada je reč o temi koja nas posebno interesuje, proizlazilo bi da nisu zastuplјeni elementi krivičnog dela neovlašćeno fotografisanje u situaciji kada je građanin zabeležio nezakonite aktivnosti drugih građana koje se odvijaju na javnim mestima, te da bi takav snimak mogao biti upotreblјen kao dokaz. Godine potvrdio presudu prvostepenog suda i utvrdio da snimak sigurnosne kamere, koju je vlasnik prodavnice postavio radi zaštite svoje imovine, ne predstavlјa nedozvolјeni dokaz zato što je reč o snimanju objekta koji je uveo držalac prostorije kao vid bezbednosne mere i zaštite svoje imovine od izvršilaca bilo kog krivičnog dela, pri čemu treba imati u vidu i činjenicu da je izvršenim veštačenjem utvrđena autentičnost snimka.

Pravni izvori
Sudske odluke
Internet izvori
SUMMARY
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call