Presumption of innocence and ensuring proof of guilt in criminal proceedings

The presumption of innocence is an important bastion against miscarriages of justice and abuse of power. It guarantees that individuals will not be punished without solid and legally established evidence of their guilt. It also guarantees the impartiality of the judicial system, avoiding biased determination of the outcome of a trial. In practice, the presumption of innocence means that the prosecution has the burden of proof, the accused is not obliged to prove his or her innocence, and any doubts should be in favour of the accused. The presumption of innocence is one of the fundamental principles of our judicial system. It balances the need to punish offences with the need to protect individual rights. Case law has established a number of requirements to ensure that the presumption of innocence is not distorted. These include the need to have sufficient and substantiated incriminating evidence, as well as to respect the fundamental rights of the accused during criminal proceedings. The author analyses the national case law which defines the stages of criminal proceedings and the main provisions of the presumption of innocence and ensuring proof of guilt. The court of its own internal conviction, based on a comprehensive, full and impartial examination of all the circumstances of criminal proceedings, guided by law, evaluates each evidence in terms of relevance, admissibility, reliability, and the totality of the evidence collected in terms of sufficiency and interconnection, based on the provisions of the presumption of innocence and ensuring proof of guilt, in particular, by virtue of Art. 62 of the Constitution of Ukraine and Article 17 of the CPC of Ukraine, the provisions of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, according to which everyone charged with a criminal offence is presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.