In our examination of the practical application in the courts, I found that many substantive objections often lead to the acquittal of a criminal, even at the later stages of appeal, particularly before the Court of Cassation. One of the most significant objections is challenging the validity of the interrogation due to a substantial defect in its procedures.
Therefore, it is crucial to shed light on this important procedure within the framework of the primary investigation. It is not an exaggeration to say that it is one of the most critical procedures that the public prosecutor must undertake. This is because it involves confronting the accused in detail, which differs from the concept of questioning within the jurisdiction of criminal investigators.
Certainly, one of the essential guarantees that legal and judicial directions emphasize is the broad freedom of the accused while facing the charges. This is to ensure all legal means that guarantee the right to defend oneself. Given the importance and danger of the interrogation during criminal investigations, the law specifies guarantees related to the interrogation, whether regarding the authority responsible for it or concerning the rights and freedoms of the accused person.
Interrogation is the stage during which the accused provides his statement to the Public Prosecutor or investigating judges in some legal systems. This crucial stage significantly influences the nature of the trial process and the issuance of a verdict of guilt or innocence. This task is entrusted to legally authorized investigators, mainly the Public Prosecutor, according to the Jordan.
Dr. Attorney Thaer Saud Al-Adwan
General Manager of Nazaha Law Firm, Legal Consultations and Arbitration