Illegally obtained evidence

The Uganda legal regime relies on the discretion of the courts in dealing with improperly obtained evidence. While various theories explain the need to exclude evidence, understanding their rationales sheds light on evaluating why the courts deal with this kind of evidence in the way they do. This article offers an assessment of selected decisions handed down by Uganda’s Supreme Court between 1995 and 2015 with regard to evidence improperly obtained through confessions. It seeks to establish the underlying theoretical considerations of the decisions, how the courts address aspects of procedural and substantive justice, and whether there is a consistent developed jurisprudence. This analysis, therefore, supports the need for reform.

The tension between safety and privacy has become an important issue in the modern world. Video
surveillance systems are indeed powerful tools for fighting crime on the one hand, and for the
protection of property from theft on the other. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has
examined the issue of video surveillance in many of its decisions. In this work, the author analyses
the issue of video surveillance over employees and its influence on fundamental human rights and
freedoms. He elaborates upon the ECtHR’s case of López Ribalda and Others v. Spain in order to
identify the balance between the right to privacy and the right to property. This is a case from the
civil law, but with elements that could may be used in the criminal proceedings. Furthermore, it
is important to determine when exactly the video footage of employees may be used as evidence
in criminal proceedings. After the introductory remarks, the author briefly deals with the facts
of the above case and explains the basic applicable international legal acts. He then observes the
issue of video surveillance from two points of view – those of Article 8 and Article 6 of the European
Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). Finally, he concludes that the
ECHR took the right direction in establishing the balance between the protection of property and
the right to privacy.

The issue of admission of evidence obtained through human rights violations is central to a criminal justice system as a mechanism through which to prevent overzealous prosecution by the state and ensure protection of human rights. As such, any court that deals with criminal cases has to evaluate evidence before it is admitted. This article argues that the Traditional Courts Bill (TCB) 1 does not provide for a mode of dealing with evidence obtained as a result of human rights violations. To substantiate this argument, the article reviews the current Bill, and reflects on the challenges that arise with regard to evidence obtained in this way. The article contextualises section 35(5) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, and discusses the practical difficulties of applying it under the current Bill. The article concludes with recommendations for measures that can ensure that accused persons are not prejudiced when appearing before the court.

Overgrep mot barn skaper sterke følelser og reaksjoner hos mange. Nettovergrep er et hurtigvoksende problem, og mulighetene er gode for å operere skjult under lav oppdagelsesrisiko. Problemet har fått private aktører til å ta loven i egne hender. Vår artikkel belyser hvilke strafferettslige og straffeprosessuelle konsekvenser det kan få når private på eget initiativ søker å oppklare og hindre seksuallovbrudd via internett mot barn. Vi ser på i hvilken utstrekning private har lov til å bruke etterforskningsmetoder som politiet ikke har, og hvilke konsekvenser det kan få når private bedriver handlingsprovokasjon. Som eksempel benyttes en konkret sak der gruppen Barnas Trygghet ervervet bevis ved provokasjon.

The normative framework of the African Commission, which regulates the admission of evidence obtained through human rights violations, is largely based on a number of instruments. These include the Tunisian Resolution, the Dakar Declaration, the Robben Island Guidelines and the Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Representation in Africa. It is argued that the emerging jurisprudence on evidence obtained through human rights violations has a limited developmental framework, owing to the normative framework. This contribution discusses the normative framework, and qualifies the limited jurisprudence. The final step engages the jurisprudence of the Commission followed by a conclusion and recommendations.