Due to several high-profile criminal cases that have arisen in the past year, the suspect’s right to remain silent is once again in the spotlight. Certainly, with victims and relatives of criminal offenses, the suspect’s right to remain silent is under fire, which is understandable. Last year, for example, the persistent silence of the suspect of multiple “insulin murders” in care homes for the elderly led to frustration and irritation among the relatives, who of course wanted to know what happened. The suspect constantly invoked his right to remain silent before the Rotterdam District Court. In the long run, this also annoyed the judges, who nevertheless continued to try to get the suspect to work.
Ana macem-macem sebab kenapa para curiga, asring menehi saran marang pengacara, njaluk hak tetep meneng. Contone, iki bisa dadi alesan strategis utawa psikologis, nanging uga kedadeyan tersangka wedi karo konsekuensi ing lingkungan kriminal. Ora preduli saka alesan kasebut, hak kanggo meneng yaiku kagungane saben curiga. Iki minangka hak klasik saka sipil, wiwit taun 1926 wis ditemtokake ing Pasal 29 ing Code of Criminal Procedure lan mulane kudu dihormati. Hak iki adhedhasar prinsip manawa curiga ora kudu nggarap kapercayan dhewe lan ora bisa dipeksa nglakoni: 'Suspect ora wajib wangsulan. ' Inspirasi kanggo iki yaiku larangan nyiksa.
Yen tersangka nggunakake hak iki, mula dheweke bisa nyegah pratelan kasebut dianggep ora bisa dipercaya lan ora bisa dipercaya, umpamane amarga nyimpang saka sing dicritakake dening wong liya utawa saka sing kalebu ing file kasus. Yen tersangka tetep bisu ing wiwitan lan pratelan kasebut mengko dipasang ing pratelan liyane lan file kasebut, dheweke bakal nambah manawa dheweke bakal dipercaya karo hakim. Nggunakake hak kanggo meneng uga bisa dadi strategi sing apik yen tersangka ora bisa menehi jawaban sing bisa ditindakake kanggo umpamane polisi. Sawise kabeh, sawijining statement bisa digawe ing pengadilan pungkasan.
Nanging, strategi iki tanpa risiko. Suspect kasebut uga kudu ngerti babagan iki. Yen tersangka ditangkep lan dilebokake ing tahanan pramila, mréntah ing sisih tengen kanggo meneng bisa uga tegese manawa investigasi tetep kanggo polisi lan panguwasa ukum, kanthi dhasar ditahan prilaku terus kanggo tersangka. Pramila bisa dadi tersangka bisa tetep ditahan ing pranyata luwih dawa amarga dheweke nggawe bisu tinimbang yen dheweke nggawe pratelan. Kajaba iku, ana kemungkinan sawise ngilangi kasus utawa mbebasake saka tersangka, tersangka kasebut ora bakal menehi ganti rugi yen dheweke dhewe bakal nyalahake amarga nglanjutake tahanan tahanan kasebut. Tuntutan babagan kerusakan kasebut wis nolak kaping pirang-pirang.
Once in court, silence is not without consequences for the suspect either. After all, a judge can take silence into account in his verdict if a suspect does not provide any openness, both in the statement of evidence and in the sentence. According to the Dutch Supreme Court, the silence of the suspect can even contribute to the conviction if there is enough evidence and the suspect has not provided any further explanation. After all, the suspect’s silence can be understood and explained by the judge as follows: “The suspect has always been silent about his involvement (…) and has therefore not taken responsibility for what he has done.” Within the context of the sentence, the suspect can be blamed for his silence that he has not repented or regretted his actions. Whether the judges take the use of the right to remain silent by the suspect into account for the sentence, depends on the judge’s personal assessment and can therefore differ per judge.
Using the right to remain silent may have advantages for the suspect, but that is certainly not without risk. It is true that the suspect’s right to remain silent must be respected. However, when it comes to a lawsuit, the judges increasingly consider the silence of suspects to their own disadvantage. After all, the suspect’s right to remain silent is in practice regularly at odds with the increasing role in criminal proceedings and the importance of victims, surviving relatives or society with clear answers to the questions.
Apa wicaksana yen sampeyan nggunakake hak kasebut supaya tetep bisu sajrone sidhang polisi utawa ing sidhang kasebut gumantung saka kahanan kasus kasebut. Mula, sampeyan kudu ngubungi pengacara pidana sadurunge mutusake hak nggawe bisu. Law & More pengacara khusus kanggo hukum pidana lan seneng menehi saran lan / utawa pitulung. Apa sampeyan dadi korban utawa sedulur sing isih urip lan apa sampeyan duwe pitakon babagan hak kanggo meneng? Malah banjur Law & More’s lawyers are ready for you.