DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Yaze, Worku | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2016-06-22T09:20:01Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2016-06-22T09:20:01Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2014-09 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/970 | - |
dc.description.abstract | In jurisdictions that subscribe to adversarial mode of litigation, burdens and
standards of proof have significant roles in the adjudication and determination
of criminal cases. The operation of the principle of presumption of innocence in
such jurisdictions determines issues of who bears what burden and the extent
thereof. The Ethiopian criminal procedure system predominantly exhibits
adversarial features, and there is the need for the comprehension and
enforcement of the respective burdens and standards of proof borne by litigants.
The constraints in clarity are more pronounced in those criminal law provisions
that embrace some form of presumptions such as provisions on corruption
offences. This note highlights how issues of burden and standard of proof are
allocated as between prosecuting authorities and accused persons. Apart from
explaining the nexus between the principle of presumption of innocence,
burdens of proof and standards of proof, it indicates the implications of the
operation of the principle of presumption of innocence upon the allocation of
evidential and persuasive burdens of proof as between the state and the
accused. It further outlines the effects of the various forms of presumptions
upon the different kinds of burdens of proof. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | St. Mary's University | en_US |
dc.subject | Burden of proof, standard of proof, easing of burden of proof, criminal cases, presumption of innocence | en_US |
dc.title | Vol 8. No 1 Burdens of Proof, Presumptions and Standards of Proof in Criminal Cases | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Mizan Law Review
|