Difference between revisions of "Nullity of Procedure"
From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to searchCmattesich (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
<blockquote>''Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.''</blockquote> | <blockquote>''Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.''</blockquote> | ||
| − | In this case, nullity could arise if the police utilized torture to obtain a confession from the defendant. Although exact textual nullities will vary from country to country and will depend very much on the specific criminal procedure code, several categories of procedure are typically included as textual nullities, including: procedures concerning search and seizure<ref>French Criminal Procedure Code Article 56, 56-1, 57, | + | In this case, nullity could arise if the police utilized torture to obtain a confession from the defendant. Although exact textual nullities will vary from country to country and will depend very much on the specific criminal procedure code, several categories of procedure are typically included as textual nullities, including: procedures concerning search and seizure<ref>French Criminal Procedure Code Article 56, 56-1, 57, and 59</ref> and telephone wiretaps of a lawyer's office.<ref>French Criminal Procedure Code Article 100-7</ref> |
===Substantial or Virtual Nullities=== | ===Substantial or Virtual Nullities=== | ||
