Importance of Refusal to Give Evidence and of Indirect Evidence in Domestic Violence and Domestic Crime Cases
![handle is hein.journals/constulv2022 and id is 145 raw text is:
Marine Kvachadze*
Natia Jugeli*
Elene Gvinjilia*
IMPORTANCE OF REFUSAL TO GIVE EVIDENCE AND
OF INDIRECT EVIDENCE IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND
DOMESTIC CRIME CASES
ABSTRACT
Despite significant legislative and institutional changes in recent years, combating
violence against women and domestic violence remains a challenge.
Given the increasing number of facts of domestic violence in the country, in some cases,
perpetrators go unpunished, as domestic violence cases are generally characterised by a
lack of evidence, and it is difficult to obtain direct evidence, especially where the victim
uses the constitutional right and refuses to testify against the perpetrator who is their
close relative.
Although the Supreme Court of Georgia has repeatedly noted in recent years that due
to the specific nature of a domestic crime, even if no victim's testimony or document
confirming the absence of claims of the victim against the accused is adduced to the
case, the issue of liability of the accused must be decided based on other evidence, yet
the practice of the common courts shows that special attention is paid to the victim's
testimony in rendering judgments of conviction in such cases, especially where, by the
judgment of the Constitutional Court of Georgia of 22 January 2015, it is inadmissible
to render a judgment of conviction based on indirect testimony.
In addition, because it is usually difficult to obtain direct evidence in domestic violence
and domestic crime cases, in practice a guilty verdict is to some extent prevented by the
provision of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia being narrowly interpreted by the
Supreme Court, according to which a judgment of conviction should only be based on
a body of consistent, clear and convincing evidence, which is interpreted by the court
as requiring at least two pieces of direct evidence.
* Doctor of Law, Professor, Head of the Analytical Department of the Supreme Court of Georgia [marina.
kvachadzegsupremecourt.ge].
* Master of Law, Chief Consultant of the Analytical Department of the Supreme Court of Georgia [natia.
jugheligsupremecourt.ge].
* Master of Law, Consultant at the Analytical Department of the Supreme Court of Georgia [elene.
gvinjiliagsupremecourt.ge].](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/constulv2022&div=11&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Importance of Refusal to Give Evidence and of Indirect Evidence in Domestic Violence and Domestic Crime Cases
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most