Expertise act as evidence, accessibility and practical issues according to the Albanian legislation

Cipa Ardian
Additional contact information
Cipa Ardian: University of Tirana, Albania

Academic Journal of Business, Administration, Law and Social Sciences, 2024, vol. 10, issue 3, 67-75

Abstract: One of the most important pieces of evidence provided by the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter: CPC), is evidence with an expert, which is taken in cases when the proceeding body for resolving a specific case needs special technical, scientific or cultural knowledge. The lawmaker, as for any evidence provided in the CPC, provides for the notification of the receipt of this evidence to the subject’s party to the criminal proceeding. Even in this case, the evidence with an expert, namely the decision to appoint an expert, will be notified to the subjects of criminal proceedings of the defendant or his defense counsel. The problem encountered in practice regarding this decision is related to the fact that this decision is notified only to the person who holds the status of defendant and is not notified to the person under investigation or the person to whom the criminal offense is attributed. In fact, this attitude taken by the prosecution practice is not in line with the provisions and purpose of the CPC, which provides that the rights of the person under investigation or the person to whom the criminal offense is attributed are equated with the rights of the defendant. In relation to this fact, the Court of General Jurisdiction has taken a different position from the Court of Special Jurisdiction. The Court of General Jurisdiction always notifies the decision to perform the act of expertise to the person under investigation and a completely different position is held by the Court of Special Jurisdiction which notifies the decision to appoint the expert upon receipt of the status of the defendant. Another problematic related precisely to the decision on the notification for the assignment of the expert is his recklessness in the trial process, since the opinions held in practice are different. If we refer to the position of the Court of Special Jurisdiction, it does not declare the act of expertise unnecessary in those cases when the decision to appoint the expert has not been notified to the person under investigation. Following this manuscript, I will also consider extensively the evidence with an expert and the provisions of the CPC on this evidence, together with some concrete cases on the positions held by the jurisdictions of the courts to notify the decision to appoint an expert as subject of criminal proceedings.

Keywords: Material; procedural criminal law; Albania (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.2478/ajbals-2024-0021 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:vrs:ajbals:v:10:y:2024:i:3:p:67-75:n:1006

DOI: 10.2478/ajbals-2024-0021

Access Statistics for this article

Academic Journal of Business, Administration, Law and Social Sciences is currently edited by Endri Papajorgji

More articles in Academic Journal of Business, Administration, Law and Social Sciences from Sciendo
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().