After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/500 |
Resumo: | In the absence of statutory rules on the matter, Belgian courts traditionally applied a strict exclusionary rule for illegally gathered evidence and its fruits. The Court of Cassation in 2003 made a spectacular U-turn and prohibited exclusion of illegally obtained evidence by criminal courts, with only very limited exceptions. Parliament subsequently incorporated these judge-made principles into a binding statutory rule. As a new Code is about to be debated in Parliament, the time is right to question the “normalisation” of law enforcement officers’ disrespect for the rules. The Rule of Law will be restored by making exclusion of illegally gathered evidence the rule, but exceptionally allowing its use upon consideration of the conflicting interests. |
id |
IBRASPP-1_87a8f6dfab6d74a05d169521f8c4c7da |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.revista.ibraspp.com.br:article/500 |
network_acronym_str |
IBRASPP-1 |
network_name_str |
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence?Depois de ziguezaguear entre os extremos, finalmente senso comum? Bélgica retornará às regras razoáveis sobre ilicitude probatória?Illegally obtained evidenceAdmissibilityFair trialExclusionary ruleCodification.provas ilícitasadmissibilidadejusto processoregra de exclusãocodificação.In the absence of statutory rules on the matter, Belgian courts traditionally applied a strict exclusionary rule for illegally gathered evidence and its fruits. The Court of Cassation in 2003 made a spectacular U-turn and prohibited exclusion of illegally obtained evidence by criminal courts, with only very limited exceptions. Parliament subsequently incorporated these judge-made principles into a binding statutory rule. As a new Code is about to be debated in Parliament, the time is right to question the “normalisation” of law enforcement officers’ disrespect for the rules. The Rule of Law will be restored by making exclusion of illegally gathered evidence the rule, but exceptionally allowing its use upon consideration of the conflicting interests.Diante da omissão de normas sobre a questão, as cortes belgas tradicionalmente aplicavam regras rígidas de exclusão de provas obtidas ilegalmente e suas derivadas. A Corte de Cassação em 2003 alterou drasticamente tal posição e proibiu os tribunais de excluir as provas ilícitas, salvo exceções bastante limitadas. O Legislativo então incorporou esses princípios em uma regra legal obrigatória. Considerando os debates legislativos sobre um novo código, o momento é adequado para discutir a normalização do desrespeito às regras pelos agentes estatais. O Estado de Direito será restaurado com a consolidação da regra de exclusão das provas ilícitas, mas com a possibilidade de utilização excepcional a partir de ponderação de conflito de interesses.Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP2021-03-24info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdftext/xmlhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/50010.22197/rbdpp.v7i1.500Brazilian Journal of Criminal Procedure; Vol. 7 No. 1 (2021); 273Revista Brasileña de Derecho Procesal Penal; Vol. 7 Núm. 1 (2021); 273Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; V. 7 N. 1 (2021); 273Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; v. 7 n. 1 (2021); 2732525-510X10.22197/rbdpp.v7i1reponame:Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)instacron:IBRASPPenghttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/500/331https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/500/352Copyright (c) 2021 Frank Verbruggen, Charlotte Coningsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessVerbruggen, FrankConings, Charlotte2021-04-19T07:01:43Zoai:ojs.revista.ibraspp.com.br:article/500Revistahttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPPONGhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/oairevista@ibraspp.com.br2525-510X2359-3881opendoar:2021-04-19T07:01:43Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence? Depois de ziguezaguear entre os extremos, finalmente senso comum? Bélgica retornará às regras razoáveis sobre ilicitude probatória? |
title |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence? |
spellingShingle |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence? Verbruggen, Frank Illegally obtained evidence Admissibility Fair trial Exclusionary rule Codification. provas ilícitas admissibilidade justo processo regra de exclusão codificação. |
title_short |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence? |
title_full |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence? |
title_fullStr |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence? |
title_full_unstemmed |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence? |
title_sort |
After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence? |
author |
Verbruggen, Frank |
author_facet |
Verbruggen, Frank Conings, Charlotte |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Conings, Charlotte |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Verbruggen, Frank Conings, Charlotte |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Illegally obtained evidence Admissibility Fair trial Exclusionary rule Codification. provas ilícitas admissibilidade justo processo regra de exclusão codificação. |
topic |
Illegally obtained evidence Admissibility Fair trial Exclusionary rule Codification. provas ilícitas admissibilidade justo processo regra de exclusão codificação. |
description |
In the absence of statutory rules on the matter, Belgian courts traditionally applied a strict exclusionary rule for illegally gathered evidence and its fruits. The Court of Cassation in 2003 made a spectacular U-turn and prohibited exclusion of illegally obtained evidence by criminal courts, with only very limited exceptions. Parliament subsequently incorporated these judge-made principles into a binding statutory rule. As a new Code is about to be debated in Parliament, the time is right to question the “normalisation” of law enforcement officers’ disrespect for the rules. The Rule of Law will be restored by making exclusion of illegally gathered evidence the rule, but exceptionally allowing its use upon consideration of the conflicting interests. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-03-24 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/500 10.22197/rbdpp.v7i1.500 |
url |
https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/500 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.22197/rbdpp.v7i1.500 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/500/331 https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/500/352 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Frank Verbruggen, Charlotte Conings info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Frank Verbruggen, Charlotte Conings |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf text/xml |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Journal of Criminal Procedure; Vol. 7 No. 1 (2021); 273 Revista Brasileña de Derecho Procesal Penal; Vol. 7 Núm. 1 (2021); 273 Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; V. 7 N. 1 (2021); 273 Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; v. 7 n. 1 (2021); 273 2525-510X 10.22197/rbdpp.v7i1 reponame:Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP) instacron:IBRASPP |
instname_str |
Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP) |
instacron_str |
IBRASPP |
institution |
IBRASPP |
reponame_str |
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) |
collection |
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revista@ibraspp.com.br |
_version_ |
1809281941089812480 |