Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Introduction: the article analyzes certain issues of recognition of evidence as inadmissible in criminal proceedings of the Syrian Arab Republic, the Republic of Turkey and the Islamic Republic of Iran; it examines different legislative approaches of the Middle Eastern countries to the formation of the criminal procedural theory of inadmissibility of evidence and the criteria to be met by evidence suitable for use in criminal proceedings. Materials and Methods: the basis of the study was formed by general scientific methods of cognition, as well as comparative legal method, the use of which allowed to conduct a comparativist study of Iranian, Syrian and Turkish criminal procedure in the framework of the object of study. The materials of the study were fundamental theoretical provisions reflected in the works of Russian scientists of proceduralists, containing a comprehensive analysis of criminal procedure carried out in individual countries of the Islamic legal family. Results: the article initially substantiates the necessity of comparativist research of the legislation of the Middle Eastern countries friendly to the Russian Federation. Based on a brief analysis of individual provisions of the constitutions of Turkey, Syria and Iran, concise conclusions are drawn about the typology of these states depending on their attitude to religion. Then the norms of criminal procedural legislation regulating the issues of recognizing evidence as inadmissible in criminal proceedings are subjected to theoretical understanding. Discussion and Conclusions: the institution of inadmissibility of evidence established in the criminal proceedings of Syria, Iran and Turkey is similar in many respects to the analogous Russian criminal procedural institution. This situation is explained by the uniform westernized approach to the construction of the criminal justice system in general and evidence law in particular. The similarity in determining the inadmissibility of evidence is manifested in the observance of the main criterion – the legality of criminal proceedings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marina Kaac (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: