The presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings is a kind of conditional norm according to which the person who committed the crime is considered innocent in absentia until his guilt is proved. Such a presumption is established only for criminal law, while the presumption of guilt is characteristic of civil or business law, that is, a person is considered guilty in absentia, and he needs to provide evidence of his innocence.
The presumption of innocence is considered the most important principle that ensures the strict observance of the human rights of an unjustifiably convicted or accused person. In order to accuse an individual of committing a crime, not just words are needed, but rather strong evidence related to the essence of the matter and permitted by law, and the responsibility for proving the guilt of a person rests with investigative and other state bodies.
Article 49 of the Constitution enshrines a provision of the following nature: “Anyone accused of a crime shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty in accordance with federal laws and a court judgment that has entered into force.” Based on the foregoing, the presumption of innocence is guaranteed by the highest normative act of the country, which all citizens and investigative authorities are required to comply with regardless of their opinion.
The main purpose of the presumption is the procedural restraint of all entities conducting the proceedings, and any other persons against the suspect (accused), which allows for a full investigation of all circumstances of the case, and protects the rights of the accused from knowingly negative attitude.
Be that as it may, in almost all cases, the participants in the criminal process who are on the side of the prosecution are absolutely convinced that the person is guilty, which is a moral violation of human rights, but the defendant has a law that considers the person to be innocent and obliges all participants in the process to be impartial . And only from the moment the court accusation comes into force, the convicted person is considered guilty of crimes and may be subject to criminal punishment.
The presumption of innocence protects not only from unlawful accusations on the part of the servants of the law, but also on the part of public accusations of the mass media and various public services. Any attacks and charges can be attributed to violation of the law.
If we consider the presumption of innocence in the framework of criminal law, then the most important point is not so much the innocence of a person in the eyes of the law, but how much the need for independent proof of their innocence is. Thinking through all aspects of the presumption, the legislator clearly represented the difficulty of independently searching for evidence, because a person who has never encountered the “system”, but is only familiar with it from the literature, may simply be confused or frightened, which can lead to an error and accusation of an innocent.
At the same time, the defendant was left the right to independently prove and participate in the proceedings. If desired, the defendant / accused has the right to put forward his version of what happened and provide evidence supporting it.
The presumption of innocence has an effect not only on the person deemed guilty, but also on investigators revealing the crimes committed. It is the principle of presumption that the investigator should be guided by, ascertaining the facts of the case, because if a good and innocent person is found guilty, then suspicion, as well as an unlawful charge, will be in the nature of a legal, judicial and moral error that degrades dignity and the honor of the individual.
Thus, the presumption of innocence is not only a legal right of every person, but a defense against moral inconvenience.