About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

2022 J. Const. L. 145 (2022)
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].

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most