Master's thesis in the second section describes the development of the European Union (EU) in the criminal justice field. The development in a large part relates to the description of the conventions and instruments, with which the EU gradually moved from the idea of harmonizing legislation in this area to the principle of mutual recognition. Based on this principle, the EU seeks to establish minimum common standards for obtaining evidence, collected in another member state, that should apply to all EU member states.
These instruments relate mainly to the phase of gathering evidence, but do not give a concrete answer to the question, whether will be thus collected evidence allowed in the state where trial takes place. Consequently, the answer to the question whether the evidence (including those which come from abroad) will be admissible stays under the sovereignty of each state and depends on the particular legal regulation of criminal procedure in the member states and assessement of the judge in the particular case. That means it remains uncertain, whether the evidence will be admissible in the state where trial takes place. Therefore in the third chapter follows the presentation of the case law of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia on key issues relating to the question of the admissibility of evidence from abroad.
From the presented case law it is clear that the legal regulations of criminal procedures between the member states varies. Since the common minimum standards for obtaining evidence are insufficient for certain answer to the question whether the evidence will be admissible in the state where trial takes place, the EU is trying to explore the possibility of establishing minimum standards also in the field of admissibility of such evidence. The fourth chapter, therefore, comprises possible solutions regarding the admissibility of evidence obtained in another EU member state
|
