The Exclusion of Improperly Obtained Evidence in Greece: Putting Constitutional Rights First
International Journal of Evidence and Proof, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 181-212, 2007
32 Pages Posted: 9 May 2011
Date Written: 2007
Abstract
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.
Keywords: improperly obtained evidence, exclusionary rule, privacy, criminal procedure, comparative law
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
Gravity and the Legitimacy of the International Criminal Court
-
International Idealism Meets Domestic-Criminal-Procedure Realism
-
Good Faith, Bad Faith and the Gulf between: A Proposal for Consistent Terminology
-
The Rise and Fall of the Constitutional Exclusionary Rule in the United States
By Mark Cammack
-
Marshalling the Data: An Empirical Analysis of Canada’s s. 24(2) Case Law in the Wake of R. v. Grant
By Mike Madden
-
Debunking Five Great Myths About the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule
-
One Problem, Two Paths: A Taiwanese Perspective on the Exclusionary Rule in China
By Yu-jie Chen