The cassation instance court established that after the return of the indictment to the prosecutor, additional investigative actions were improperly conducted and new evidence was collected, which the courts of first and appellate instances took into account when rendering decisions. This contradicts the legal position of the United Chamber of the Supreme Court, according to which the resumption of pre-trial investigation and obtaining new evidence is not allowed after the return of the indictment. Additionally, the appellate court did not provide a proper assessment of the admissibility of evidence obtained after the return of the indictment.
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.