"الكفاية النوعية للدلائل المبررة للتوقيف"

Abstract

Detention is one of the most serious criminal procedure and the most harmful to personal freedom. The detainee is deprived of his liberty for a relatively long period of time compared with the period of arrest. However, the concept of sufficient evidence is uncontrolled and unspecified concept that permits the abuse of this dangerous authority. Guaranteed by the procedural legality mentioned above, which required the establishment of objective criteria to regulate as much as possible such authority?

In this study, we examine the specificity of sufficient evidence of detention based on the quality of these evidences, not only on the significance of the evidence, but on the role of interrogations and guarantees in determining the specificity and legal adequacy of such evidence. And to discuss the views that said that interrogation is mandatory as a result of all this.

We concluded at the end of this research that the function of sufficient evidence is gradual as it passes through the stages of criminal procedures until it culminates in the arrest warrant, since it cannot be taken without first weighing the evidence of conviction with the defense evidence. If evidence of innocence begins to appear in the first investigation (arrest and inspection) procedure, But begins to weigh in the increase and begins its role in growing from the formal or explicit accusation stage, which begins with interrogation, shows a different and different concept of sufficient evidence for arrest, where evidence begins to play an important role in it, taking a double nature, But in which the evidence of innocence is weighed with it. Therefore, the adequacy of this stage may be described as double, strict or balanced.

We also found that if the quality of the evidence for detention is inevitably and closely related to the interrogation, this does not necessarily mean that the interrogation is necessary, except in two cases: detention the accused and asking the investigating authority to interrogate him. Of the rights of the defense and a guarantee determined by law to his favor as an accused.