The Exclusion of Improperly Obtained Evidence in Greece
Putting Constitutional Rights First
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12596178 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Dimitrios Giannoulopoulos (0000-0003-4033-5211, Lecturer, Brunel University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2007 |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 181-212 |
| Publication date | 2007-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The International Journal of Evidence & Proof (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1365-7127 • E-ISSN: 1740-5572 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1350/ijep.2007.11.3.181 |
| OpenAlex | W2117409125 |
| Language | EN |
In contrast with England and Wales, where there is a discretion to exclude improperly obtained evidence, exclusion in Greece is automatic. Article 177 para. 2 of the Code of Penal Procedure mandates that evidence obtained by the commission of criminal offences is not taken into consideration. In addition, article 19 para. 3 of the Constitution prohibits the use of evidence obtained in violation of the right to privacy. Inspired by the rigidity of these exclusionary rules, the rights-centred approach that they reflect and the context of a constitutional criminal procedure within which they apply, this article sheds light on the protection of constitutional rights as a rationale for the exclusion of improperly obtained evidence. It does so against the background of the reliability-centred exclusionary doctrine in England
Commission · Constitution · Constitutional law · Context (archaeology · Criminal procedure · Discretion · Doctrine · Exclusionary Rule · Judicial discretion · Judicial review · Political science · Supreme court · Criminal Law and Evidence · Criminal Law and Policy · European Criminal Justice and Data Protection · History · Law
| Highly cited | No |
|---|