Criminal and Procedural Protection of Human Rights During the Evidence Collection Stage: A Comparative Study

Abstract

This research is based on the established constitutional principle of "presumption of innocence," which guarantees humane treatment for individuals, presuming them innocent until a final judicial ruling is issued. From this perspective, the importance of examining the criminal and procedural protection of human rights during the evidence-gathering phase becomes clear, as it is the first preliminary stage in criminal proceedings and the point of direct contact between individuals and law enforcement agencies.

This study seeks to delineate the boundaries between the state's authority to pursue crimes and protect society, and its strict obligation to uphold the presumption of innocence and the physical and moral dignity of the individual. The research problem lies in the adequacy and effectiveness of legislative texts in protecting the "presumption of innocence" during the preliminary investigation, given that this stage is a precautionary administrative phase preceding the formal investigation and lacks the same stringent judicial safeguards. This exposes personal freedom to the risks of abuse, arbitrary arrest, and the unlawful extraction of confessions.

To address this issue, the study examined several key areas, beginning with the principle of presumption of innocence, which prohibits treating suspects as guilty and requires law enforcement agencies to maintain complete impartiality during investigations and interrogations. It also addressed substantive criminal protections that criminalize all forms of coercion, torture, and violations of physical or mental integrity, and impose deterrent penalties on those who abuse their authority. The study also addressed the procedural protection that restricts the powers of arrest, detention, search, and violation of the sanctity of homes or communications with specific provisions and time limits that may not be exceeded except in cases of clear flagrante delicto or by a reasoned judicial order, leading to the procedural penalty represented by the application of the rule “what is built on falsehood is false”, and the dismissal of any evidence or confession derived from an illegal procedure, with the arrangement of criminal and disciplinary liability for violators.

The research concluded that respecting the presumption of innocence and adhering to procedural legality during the evidence-gathering phase are the cornerstones of a fair trial and the validity of all criminal judgments. Accordingly, the study recommended the necessity of adopting digital audio and video documentation of all records and procedures to ensure transparency, along with enhancing the legal and human rights training of judicial officers to ensure the application of national and international human rights standards.