Basic principles of the evaluation of evidence laid down in Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The legal assessment of evidence in a given process is given by the court. The specificity of the assessment of evidence reflects the law itself. Prosecutors will justify evidence of guilt, and lawyers will question them and put forward counterarguments proving the innocence of the defendant.
How does the proof system work?
Evaluation of the information presented in criminal, administrative cases proceeds from different assumptions due to the concept of evidence. In criminal trials of the present, any evidence base is based on the presumption of innocence. It is from this point of view that the court evaluates the evidence presented. Assessment of evidence is based on Part 3 of Art. 67. The main acceptance criterion is the objectiveness of evidence: all arguments based on internal conviction will not be accepted by the court.
Thus, any evidence in legal terms must meet several requirements:
- it must be valid in order to be accepted by the court;
- it must be objective and not dependent on the point of view of the prosecution or the defense;
- it must be reliable and sufficient.
Based on the foregoing, it is possible to formulate the practice of accepting defense or prosecution arguments as a specific legal algorithm that allows you to research evidence, evaluate evidence to obtain reliable information in fact.
What are the grades of evidence?
Depending on the level of reliability of the data provided , the assessment may be:
- preliminary;
- final;
- control.
A preliminary assessment is made by the court in the proceedings. The final is contained in the court verdict. Control assessment may be submitted by the court of appeal.
Modern legal practice distinguishes between three types of assessment of evidence and analyzes the information received according to the criteria below.
Formal assessment of evidence
A formal assessment of evidence puts the court in a framework in which the provision of an argument automatically means that a decision is made. In this case, the strength of the evidence presented is already determined by law and cannot be evaluated depending on other factors. A court session may resemble a mathematical problem, where the answer can be found by a given algorithm. For quite some time, such formal evidence was a guilty plea, after which a sentence was issued, often not supported by material evidence. So, in Russia before the judicial reform, there were various methods of formal assessment of evidence: men were trusted more than women, certain privileges were granted to persons of the nobility class and so on. Now, a similar technique is applied in a completely different way, and one of the examples of formal assessment is given in part 7 of Art. 67 GIC.
The court will not consider copies of the same document that are not identical to each other, in the absence of the original. However, the court will not evaluate this or that copy from the point of view of reliability: incomplete identity means that both such documents cannot be considered by the court.
Sometimes copies can still be accepted by the court as evidence. Assessment of evidence in this case is carried out according to other parameters.
Free assessment of evidence
In this case, all evidence is considered equal. Assessment of evidence takes place according to the criteria that are determined by the court. This is especially true for indirect evidence and arguments. Indirect evidence does not have a predetermined order of consideration; it should be taken into account only in relation to other aspects of the case. Free evaluation of evidence in European countries - jury responsibility. It is they who interpret evidence and circumstantial evidence and substantiate the court decision. By the way, the jury is not required to disclose the principles by which this or that evidence was selected or rejected, as well as its subjective opinion.
Free with motives
The principles for evaluating evidence in a free manner, taking into account motives, are the prerogative of a professional court. The court is obliged to disclose the results of the consideration of the evidence presented, their assessment in the final decision. The verdict is required to disclose the motives according to which some evidence was accepted, while others were rejected. Often this requirement is not met, and the court makes its decision based on unclear principles for the selection and consideration of evidence.
Difficulty assessing evidence
There is nothing more difficult to understand than evaluating evidence. At the household level, each of us can select arguments that are acceptable to us and justify our own point of view. In a judicial dispute, everything is different: subjectivity should be minimized, and the assessment of evidence should be unbiased and thorough. One example of such complexity is the expert opinion. They are far from as unambiguous as is commonly believed. Often, various expert commissions, evaluating the health of the equipment, the safety of the workplace or the originality of the document, refer to various circumstances and put forward various conclusions. The case of the court is to assess the reliability of the evidence presented in order to make an objective court decision.
Subjective factors in assessing evidence
The adopted system of legal proceedings does not allow a decision to be made without indicating motives, because such a position is, in fact, a denial of the right to a fair trial. On the other hand, most of the motives leading to the court lie in the field of subjective perception of the order of things, which is unreasonable to ignore. A sense of superiority or humiliation, hatred, love, self-interest - all this should be taken into account when evaluating the evidence base. And not all of these motives are equivalent in the eyes of the court. Love is a virtue, so the court often bases its decisions on the testimonies of lovers. Hatred is a vice, so the court may justly doubt the testimony of a witness obsessed with hatred. But an equal treatment of all witnesses providing evidence is an indispensable attribute of any unbiased court.
Gathering and evaluating evidence requires excellent knowledge of human nature, the origins of patterns, the presence of causes, and the assessment of probabilities. These components are the essence of a good lawyer. Using direct and indirect evidence, he can make a reliable picture of events.
Evidence review principles
Assessment of evidence in a civil process is based on epistemological principles. Consider the most basic of them, which will help to understand the algorithms for selecting evidence. One of the main principles is pre-installation. This factor should not replace a free assessment and, according to modern principles of conducting business, not a single evidence in the case has a predetermined force, all of them must be accepted with reservations.
Presumption
The presumption is another basis for making a fair decision under equal probabilistic conditions. The presumption in jurisprudence is similar to the axiom in geometry: it is accepted “as is” and does not need proof, since it is based on all human experience. If in a criminal trial all doubts must be interpreted in favor of the accused, there is no such norm in civil law. The presumption in this case is the brick from which the position of one side or another in the process is formed.
Assessment of evidence in a civil proceeding is based on one or more presumptions, among which is accepted with little or no evidence:
- the fault of the offender;
- legality of children born in wedlock;
- inconsistency of reality of information discrediting dignity and honor and so on.