The illegality of convictions based exclusively on evidence from the investigative phase: violation of the principles of full defense and adversarial process by a ratified police statement

Abstract

The present study addresses the violation of the principles of adversarial proceedings, full defense, and due process by a police witness who merely corroborates the testimony given during the police investigation in court hearings. Its general objective is to verify whether police testimony, given in a generic manner, read aloud, or corroborated during a hearing, violates the principles of adversarial proceedings, full defense, and due process. To achieve this aim, the study will delve into the principles of adversarial proceedings, full defense, due process, and reasoned conviction. Additionally, a comparison will be made between these principles and the provisions of articles 155 and 204 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in order to ascertain whether testimony read aloud or corroborated by police officers during a hearing can be considered as evidence for criminal conviction. This study will be conducted through bibliographical research, involving an examination of the Criminal Procedure Code with a focus on articles 155 and 204, the Federal Constitution, legal doctrines, case law, international treaties, and similar sources. As a result, legal doctrines and case law consistently maintain that testimony read aloud or corroborated cannot serve as evidence for criminal conviction, as doing so would violate due process and full defense principles