The presumption of innocence is one of the basic principles of the criminal procedure legislation of any civilized country. At the same time, the legal and ethical aspects of this principle are still actively discussed in the theory of law.
The presumption of innocence is enshrined as one of the basic norms of Russian criminal procedure law. It proclaims that no one can be considered guilty of any crime until the time when his guilt is proven, established by an effective court decision.
It should be noted that such a norm is characteristic of criminal law, in which it is the state, represented by its representatives, that is obliged to prove the guilt of the suspect, the accused. In civil law relations, the defendant is considered guilty by default until the time when he himself is not active in proving his innocence, unless otherwise specified in the law.
Legal aspects of the presumption of innocence
The main legal aspect of this principle is reduced to the need to ensure the basic rights of a person, a citizen. The perpetrator of a crime is exposed to various negative consequences, and the presumption of innocence exempts from them those persons whose involvement in illegal acts has not been established.
Another important legal aspect is the need to prove guilt, and not an unfounded statement by the investigating authorities, to inquire about the commission of a crime by a specific person. Finally, such a presumption ensures the adversarial nature of the criminal process, since in the presence of a predetermined decision on the guilt of the defendant, his defense loses all meaning.
Ethical aspects of the presumption of innocence
The ethical aspects of the presumption of innocence are considered equally important. The absolute conviction of many participants in the criminal process, other persons in the guilt of the defendant can be expressed in offensive statements, other negative moments that humiliate the honor and dignity of the person. The law does not allow such a situation, speaking of the alleged innocence of the defendant.
In addition, an important ethical aspect of this presumption is that the defendant is not obliged to prove his innocence. If such a duty were present, then it would exert significant moral pressure on the defendant, the accused, who is already in an unenviable position without it. At the same time, the defendant retains the right to provide any evidence; he can use this opportunity at his own discretion.
