አክተር አብይን በፓርላማ!

Actor Abe in Parliament!
What kind of movie did you like when I was a kid? If you tell me, I really like Indian films, especially karate. There is nothing impossible in Indian film. Everything is possible. It’s good that the actors are pretending. On Indian film: For example, you can see a thief in Addis Ababa slapping his family in Bahir Dar or Jimma. Indian film is like this
The Ethiopian actor will also unveil his new film in parliament tomorrow. It will also unveil its ten-year development plan. It is expected that the film will have an amazing story and a series of comedy series. Many Ethiopians, many mothers, especially in tomorrow’s parliamentary film; Many widows and widowers are expected to applaud.
Let me tell you something today, my friend! Tomorrow’s parliamentary drama: Fugera: And let me warn you not to pretend to be “poisoned honey” again! Stay awake, Look at your life, look at yourself. All that is being said to you so far is that you have benefited from the Indian film I mentioned above; Changed: You have nothing to gain by 0.0%.
Actor Abby as yesterday, As before: He is 3 years old today; He still wants to take you away, so not for me, but for your own life, For your own family, Sincerely for your future Ethiopia; Your people If you like, the trick presented by Actor Abby: Sit aside, ask why you are here today, and wait until tomorrow is a good day.
. *
The speech I used as an introduction is the speech of Actor Abe! That’s what he used to say when he was teasing people. The fact is, the truth is on the ground right now. These kinds of lies: Lies: Simulations: If you want to listen, it’s easy to make sure you watch the videos. But my party, wake up! I said! I do not want to hear any more cries, Because I don’t want to grieve again! Yes, folks, wake up!

አክተር አብይን በፓርላማ!

.* “ተፎካካሪን አስሮ፣ ሃሳብ ዘግቶ የመንደር አለቃ መኮን ይቻል ይሆናል እንጅ የሀገር መሪ መሆን አይቻልም” አብይ አህመድ ዶ/ር .*
ልጅ እያለሁ ምን አይነት ፊልም ትወዳለህ ? ብትሉኝ የህንድ ፊልም በተለይ የካራቴ በጣም ደስ ይለኛል። በቃ በህንድ ፊል የማይቻል የለም። ሁሉ ነገር ይቻላል። አክተሮቹ ሲያስመስሉ ለጉድ ነው። በህንድ ፊልም ላይ ፤ ለምሳሌ አዲስ አበባ ላይ በጥፊ የምትመታው ሌባ ባህርዳር ወይም ጅማ ላይ የሚገኘው ቤተሰቡ በጥፊው ሲወድቅ ልታይ ትችላላችሁ። የህንድ ፊልም እንዲህ ነው

ኢትዮጵያዊው አክተርም ነገ በፓርላማ አዲሱን ፊልሙን ያስመርቃል። የአስር አመቱን የልማት እቅድ ይፋ በማድረግ ገለፃም ያደርጋል። ፊልሙ ገራሚ ታሪክ እና ተከታታይ አስቂኝ ክፍሎችም እንዳሉት ከወዲሁ ይገመታል። በተለይ በነገው የፓርላማ ፊልም ላይ ብዙ ኢትዮጵያኖችን ብዙ እናቶችን ፤ ብዙ ወንድ ባልቴቶችን እና ሴት ባልቴቶችን በጭብጨባ እንደሚገለጡ ይገመታል።

ወዳጄ እኔ ዛሬ አንድ ነገር ላንቃህ! ከነገው የፓርላማ ድራማ ፤ ፉገራ ፤ እና ማስመስል ተሸውደህ ድጋሚ “በመርዝ የተለወሰ ማር” እንዳትልስ ላስጠንቅቅህ! ነቅተህ አካባቢህን ፤ ኑሮህን ፤ራስህን ተመልከት። እስከ ዛሬ የሚወራልህ ሁሉ ከላይ ከጠቀስኩት ከህንድ ፊልም ውጪ መሬት ወርዶ የጠቀመህ ፤ የተለወጠ ፤ ያሻሻለህ 0.0% ያገኘው የምታገኘውም ምንም ነገር የለም።

አክተር አብይ እንደ ትላንቱ ፤ እንደ ድሮው ፤ እንደ ዛሬ 3 አመቱ ፤ አሁንም ሊሸውድህ አስቧል ስለዚህ ለእኔ ብለህ ሳይሆን ለገዛህ ኑሮህ ፤ ለገዛህ ቤተሰብህ ፤ ለወደፊቷ ኢትዮጵያ ብለህ ከልብ ሀገርህን ፤ ህዝብህን ፤ ከወደድክ በአክተር አብይ የሚቀርብልህን ሽንገላ ፤ ወደጎን አድርገህ ዛሬ ነቅተህበት ለምን ብለህ ጠይቀህ መልካም ቀን እስኪመጣ ጠብቅ እንጂ በነገ ንግግሩ አትጓጓ!

ከላይ እንደ መግቢያ የተጠቀምኩት ንግግር የአክተር አብይን ንግግር ነው! ያኔ ድሮ ሲሸውዳቹ እንዲህ ብሎ ተናግሮ ነው ህዝብን ያስደመመው። እውነታው ደግሞ አሁን መሬት ላይ ያለው እውነት ነው። የዚህ አይነት ቅጥፈቶች ፤ ውሸቶች ፤ ማስመሰሎች ፤ መስማት ከፈለጋችሁ ደግሞ ቀላል ነው ቪዲዎቹን መመልከት ማረጋገጥ ነው። እኔ ግን ወገኔ ንቃ! ብያለሁ! ደጋሚ ለቅሶዎች መስማት ስለማልፈልግ፤ ድጋሚ ማዘን ስለማልፈልግ ! አዎ ወገኔ ንቃ!

Basic Rules of International Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts

Basic Rules of International Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts

The seven fundamental rules which are the basis of the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols:

1 – Persons hors de combat and those who do not take a direct part in hostilities are entitled to respect for their lives and their moral and physical integrity. They shall in all circumstances be protected and treated humanely without any adverse distinction.

2 – It is forbidden to kill or injure an enemy who surrenders or who is hors de combat.

3 – The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for by the party to the conflict which has them in its power. Protection also covers medical personnel, establishments, transports and equipment. The emblem of the red
cross or the red crescent is the sign of such protection and must be respected.

4 – Captured combatants and civilians under the authority of an adverse party are entitled to respect for their lives, dignity, personal rights and convictions. They shall be protected against all acts of violence and reprisals. They shall have the right to correspond with their families and to receive relief.

5 – Everyone shall be entitled to benefit from fundamental judicial guarantees. No one shall be held responsible for an act he has not committed. No one shall be subjected to physical or mental torture, corporal punishment or cruel or degrading treatment.

6 – Parties to a conflict and members of their armed forces do not have an unlimited choice of methods and means of warfare. It is prohibited to employ weapons or methods of warfare of a nature to cause unnecessary losses or excessive suffering.

7 – Parties to a conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants in order to spare civilian population and property. Neither the civilian population as such nor civilian persons shall be the object of attack. Attacks shall be directed solely against military objectives.

=======በወንጀል ጉዳይ የማስረጃ አሰባሰብ እና አቀራረብ=========

በወንጀል ጉዳይ የማስረጃ አሰባሰብ እና አቀራረብ

=======.   ለንቃተ ህግ ትምህርት .======

የወንጀል ህግ ዋና አላማ የህዝብን ሰላም እና ደህንነት ማስጠበቅ ነው፡፡ በመሆኑም ሰዎች የእለት ተእለት ኑሯቸውን በሚመሩበት ሂደት ውስጥ ህገመንግስታዊ መብቶቻቸው ሊጠበቁላቸው የሚገባ መሆኑ እንዳለ ሆኖ እነሱም የሌላውን ሰው መብት የማክበር እና ከመጣስ የመቆጠብ ግዴታ አለባቸው፡፡ይሁንና ይህን ግዴታቸውን ቸል በማለት የሌላውን ሰው መብት የሚጥሱ ከሆነ የወንጀል፣ ፍትሀብሄራዊ እንዲሁም አስተዳደራየአስተዳደር ህግ እና የሰብዓዊ መብት አፈፃፀም

 የአስተዳደር ህግ እና የሰብዓዊ መብት አፈፃፀም

ተደጋግሞ እንደተገለፀው የመንግስት ስልጣን በወርድም በቁመትም እየሰፋ በመጣ ቁጥር ለዜጐች መብትና ነፃነት ፀር ነው፡፡ የአስተዳደር ህግ የስልጣንን አስፈላጊነት አምኖ ተቀብሎታል፡፡ ውጤታማ አስተዳደር እንዲሁም ቀልጣፋ የአገልግሎት አቅርቦት እንዲኖር የሚያስር ሳይሆን የሚፈታ ስልጣን ያስፈልጋል፡፡ ሆኖም ከህግና ከህገ መንግስት የሚያፈነግጥ ስልጣን ከጥቅሙ ጉዳቱ ያመዝናል፡፡ የበዘፈቀደ ድርጊት፣ ‘እንደፈለግኩኝ እሆናለው እፈልጣለው እቆርጣለው!’ የሚል አካሄድ አቅመ ቢስ የሆነውን ዜጋ የመኖር፣ በነፃነት የመንቀሳቀስ፣ የመናገር፣ ሀሳብን የመግለፅና ንብረት የማፍራት መሰረታዊ መብት አለገደብ ይሸረሽራል፡፡

የአስተዳደር ህግ የሰብዓዊ መብትን በማስጠበቅ ረገድ ያለው ሚና የሁለቱን ትስስር በሚገባ ያሳየናል፡፡ ህጉ በሰብዓዊ መብት አጠባበቅና አፈፃፀም ላይ ያለውን አዎንታዊ ተፅእኖ በሚገባ ለመረዳት ከሰብዓዊ መብቶች አተገባበር አንፃር የመንግስትን ግዴታ መተንተኑ አግባብነት ይኖረዋል፡፡ እነዚህም ሚናዎች (ግዴታዎች) የማክበር (respect) የማስከበር (protect) እንዲሁም የመፈጸምና የማስፈፀም (enforcement) ናቸው፡፡

በመጀመሪያው መብቶችን የማክበር የመንግስት ሚና ዜጐች ነፃ ሆነው መብታቸውን ሲጠቀሙ ከየትኛውም የመንግስት አካል የሚመጣ ጣልቃ ገብነትን ይገድባል፡፡ በተለይም መሰረታዊ በሚባሉት በህይወት የመኖር፣ የመፃፍ፣ የመናገር፤ የፈለጉትን ሀይማኖት የመከተል፤ በነፃነት የመዘዋወርና ንብረት የማፍራት መብቶችና ነፃነቶች በተግባር የሚረጋገጡት መንግስት እጁን ሲሰበስብ ነው፡፡ እነዚህ መብቶች በመንግስት በተለይ በስራ አስፈፃሚውና በስሩ ባሉት የአስተዳደር ተቋማት ውሳኔ፤ ትዕዛዝ፤ ደንብና መመሪያ አማካይነት አደጋ ላይ ሊወድቁ ይችላሉ፡፡ ህገ መንግስቱ የበላይ ህግ እንደመሆኑ ይህን የሚቃረን ህግ፣ ውሳኔና አሰራር ሁሉ ተፈፃሚነት አይኖረውም፡፡ ይህን መሰሉ የህገ መንግስታዊነት ጥያቄ በአስተዳደር ህግ ውስጥ አይወድቅም፡፡ ይሁን እንጂ የህገ መንግስታዊነት ብቻ የሚመስል ጥያቄ በአስተዳደር ህግ ማእቀፍ የሚሸፈንበት አጋጣሚ ሰፊ ነው፡፡

በአንድ የአስተዳደር ተቋም የወጣ መመሪያ በህግ አውጭው ከተሰጠ የውክልና ስልጣን በማለፍ የዜጐችን ሰብዓዊ መብት የሚገድብ ሆኖ ከተገኘ በውስጡ የህገ መንግስታዊነት (constitutionality) ጥያቄ ያዘለ ቢሆንም በዋናነት ግን የአስተዳደር ህግ ሊመልሰው የሚገባ የህጋዊነት (legality) ጥያቄ ነው፡፡ ልዩነታቸውን የበለጠ መረዳት እንዲያስችልን የሚከተለውን የድሮው የገቢዎች ሚኒስቴር የአሁኑ የገቢዎችና ጉምሩክ ባለስልጣን መመሪያ እንመልከት፡፡

ማንኛውም የጉምሩክ ፖሊስ ሰላማዊ ስልፍና የስራ ማቆም አድማ ማድረግ አይችልም፡፡

ሰላማዊ ሰልፍ የማድረግ መብት በኢ.ፌ.ዲ.ሪ ህገ መንግስት ለማንኛውም ሰው የተረጋገጠ መብት ነው፡፡ መብቱን የሚያጎናጽፈው የአንቀጽ 30 ንዑስ ቁጥር 1 እንዲህ ይነበባል፡፡

ማንኛውም ሰው ከሌሎች ጋር በመሆን መሳሪያ ሳይዝ በሰላም የመሰብሰብ ሰላማዊ ሰልፍ የማድረግ ነፃነትና አቤቱታ የማቅረብ መብት አለው፡፡

አንድ መመሪያ በስራ አስፈፃሚው አካል ሲወጣ ከህግ አውጭው በግልጽ የተሰጠ የውክልና ስልጣን (Delegation) ሊኖር ይገባል፡፡ መመሪያው የውክልና ስልጣኑን ገደብ ካለፈ ከስልጣን በላይ (Ulta vires) ነው፡፡ ስለሆነም በህግ ፊት ዋጋ አልባ (null and void) ነው፡፡ የገቢዎች ሚኒስቴር ይህን መመሪያ ሲያወጣ የስልጣን ምንጩን የጉምሩክ ባለስልጣንን ለማቋቋምና አስራሩን ለመወሰን የወጣው አዋጅ . 368/1995 አንቀጽ 8 (2) () እንደሆነ ይጠቅሳል፡፡ ይህ የተጠቀሰው የህግ ድንጋጌ እንዲህ ይነበባል፡፡

የጉምሩክ ህግ እንዲያስከብር ከፌደራል ፖሊስ ኮሚሽን የተመደበን የፖሊስ ኃይል ሚኒስቴሩ የፌደራል ፖሊስ አዋጅን ተከትሎ በሚያወጣው መመሪያ መሰረት በስራ ያሰማራል፡፡ ያስተዳድራል፡፡ ጥፋት ሲገኝም ያሰናብታል፡፡

ይህ አንቀጽ የጉምሩክ ፖሊስ ሰላማዊ ሰልፍ እንዳያደርግ በመመሪያ እንዲከለክል ለገቢዎች ሚኒስቴር ስልጣን አይሰጥም፡፡ ከተወካዮች ምክር ቤት ግልፅ ስልጣን ባልተሰጠበት ሁኔታ የወጣው ይህ መመሪያ ህጋዊነት ሆነ ተፈፃሚነት የለውም፡፡ የአስተዳደር ህግ ይህን መሰል መመሪያዎች በዘፈቀደ እየወጡ የዜጐችን መብትና ነፃነት እንዳይጥሱ በተለያዩ መንገዶች በመቆጣጠር መንግስት ሰብዓዊ መብት የማክበር ግዴታውን እንዲወጣ ያደርጋል፡፡

የመንግስት የማስፈፀም ኃላፊነት አብዛኛውን ጊዜ ከማህበራዊ፤ ኢኮኖሚያዊና ባህላዊ መብቶች ጋር በቀጥታ ተያይዞ ይነሳል፡፡ መንግስት በዜጐች መብት ላይ ጣልቃ አለመግባቱ ወይም እጁን መሰብሰቡ ብቻ አይበቃም፡፡ ለዜጋው መሰረታዊ አገልግሎቶችን ማለትም ጤና፣ መብራት፣ ውሃ፣ መንገድ ወዘተ… ካላቀረበ ነፃ መሆን በራሱ ፋይዳ የለውም፡፡

የአስተዳደር ህግ እና የሰብዓዊ መብት ትሰስር ከመንግስት የማስከበር ግዴታ አንጻርም ሊቃኝ ይችላል፡፡ ከዚህ አንጻር መንግስት ሰብዓዊ መብትን በማስከበር ኃላፊነቱ መብት እንዳይጣስ የስልጣን መቆጣጠሪያ ስልቶች በህግ እና በተቋማዊ አደረጃጀት የማጠናከር፣ በመብት መጣስ ጉዳት ለደረሰበት ዜጋ ፈጣን ፍትህ የሚያገኝበትን ስርዓት መዘርጋት አለበት ማለት ነው፡፡ በአጭር አገላለጽ ሰብዓዊ መብቶች እንዲከበሩ መንግስት የዳበረ የአስተዳደር ህግ እና የአስተዳደር ህግ ስርዓት መቅረጽ፣ መትከልና ማጐልበት ይጠበቅበታል፡፡

ዊ እርምጃ ሊወሰድባቸው የተገባ ስለመሆኑ  በተለያዩ ህጎቻችን ላይ መመልከት እንችላለን፡፡

እነኚ እርምጃዎች እንደየጉዳዮቹ ባህሪ በፍርድ ቤት ወይም በአስተዳደራዊ ወይም አስፈጻሚ  ተቋማት ሊወሰዱ የሚችሉ ናቸው፡፡

የወንጀል ተጠያቂነትን በተመለከተ ፍ/ቤቶች በዋናናት እና በብቸኝነት ፍርድ የመስጠት ስልጣን ያላቸው ስለመሆኑ በህገመንግስቱ አንቀጽ 79(1)ስር ተቀምጦ የሚገኘው ድንጋጌ ያመላክተናል፡፡

በመሆኑም ፍ/ቤቶች የዳኝነት ስራቸውን በማከናወን ሂደት ውስጥ የሚቀርቡላቸውን ክሶች በመቀበል ማስተናግድ እና ፍትሃዊ እና ተገቢውን ፍርድ መስጠት የሚችሉት ጉዳዩን ለማረጋገጥ የሚችል በቂ ማስረጃ ሲገኝ ነው፡፡በወንጀል ጉዳይ ፍርድ ቤቶች ጉዳዩን ከማስተናገዳቸው በፊት ቅድሚያ ሊከናወኑ የሚገባቸው ዋና ዋና ጉዳዮች አሉ፡፡ እነኚህም የወንጀል ምርመራ እና ክስ አመሰራረት ሂደቶች  ናቸው፡፡

በመሆኑም ፖሊስ ከዐቃቤ ህግ ጋር በጋራ በመሆን  በሚያደርገው የምርመራ ስራ አንድን ድርጊት ፈጽሟል በሚል የተጠረጠረን ሰው ለፈጸመው ወንጀል እንዲቀጣ በማድረግ እራሱን አድራጊውንም ሆነ መሰል ተግባራትን የሚፈጽሙ ሰዎችን ለማስተማር ይቻል ዘንድ ፍርድ ቤት የሚቀርቡ ከሆነ ተከሳሽን ጥፋተኛ ሊያስብሉ የሚችሉ ማስረጃዎችን በሚገባ ማሰባሰብ እና የምርመራ መዝገብ ማደራጀት አለበት፡፡

ቀላል የማይባል ቁጥር ያለው የህብረተሰቡ ክፍል በዚህ ረገድ ካለው የግንዛቤ ማጣት እና ለህግ ተገዢ ለመሆን ፍቃደኛ ካለመሆን ጋር ተያይዞ በምርመራ ወቅት ፖሊስ በማስረጃነት የሚፈልጋቸው መረጃዎችን እና ማስረጃዎችን ካለመግለጽ አንስቶ እስከ መሰወር የሚደርስ ተግባራት ሲፈጽሙ እናስተውላለን፡፡

ይሁንና የምርመራ ስራ ያለህዝብ ተሳትፎ እና ትብብር ውጤታማ ሊሆን የማይችል በመሆኑ ህዝብ የመንግስት አይን በመሆን ህገ ወጥ ተግባራትን ከማጋለጥ አንስቶ መረጃዎችን እና ማስረጃዎችን ለመርማሪው አካል በመስጠት የማስረጃ አሰባሰብ ስርዓቱን በባለቤትነት ስሜት መደገፍ መቻል አለበት፡፡

በዚህ ጽሁፍም ፖሊስ በሚያከናውነው የወንጀል ምርመራ ስራ ውስጥ ማስረጃዎችን እንዴት ሊያሰባስብ እና ስለሚቀርቡበት እንደሚገባ፣የማስረጃዎችን ምንነት እና አስፈላጊነት፣ ስለ ማስረጃዎች ተቀባይነት፣ ህዝቡ መጫወት ስለሚገባው ሚና እና ስለ ማስረጃ ጽንሰ ሀሳብ ዋና ዋና ነጥቦችን ለመዳሰስ ጥረት ይደረጋል፡፡   

1.የወንጀል ማስረጃ ምንነት

ህጎቻችን ማስረጃን የሚመለከቱ አያሌ ድንጋጌዎችን በውስጣቸው የያዙ ቢሆንም ማስረጃን ግልጽ ሊያደርግ የሚችል ትርጉም ሰጥተውት አንመለከትም፡፡በመሆኑም የማስረጃን ምንነትን ለመረዳት  የተለያዩ የህግ ሊቆች ለቃሉ የሰጡትን ትርጉም ማየቱ ተገቢ ነው የሚሆነው፡፡

ሪቻርድ ሜይ የተባለው የህግ ጸሀፍት ለማስረጃ በሰጠው ትርጉም ማንኛውንም ፍሬ ነገር ወይም መደምደሚያን ለማረጋገጥ ወይም ለማስተባበል የሚጠቅም መረጃ ነው፡፡በክስ ማሰማት ሂደትም በጭብጥ የተያዙ ፍሬ ነገሮችን ለማረጋገጥ ወይም ለማስተባበል በሚል የሚቀርብ መረጃ ነው ይላሉ፡፡

በሌላ በኩል ማስረጃን ፍሬ ነገርን ወይም በጭብጥነት የተያዘን ጉዳይ መኖር አለመኖርን ውሳኔ በተመለከተ ውሳኔ ለሚሰጠው የዳኝነት አካል ለማሳመን በማሰብ የሚቀርብ መረጃ ነው በሚል ሊተረጎምም ይችላል፡፡

ከነኚህ ትርጉሞች የምንረዳው ማስረጃ የአንድን ነገር መፈጸም፣ወይም መፈጸም ግዴታ ሆኖ እያለ ባለመፈጸም ህግን መተላለፍ በወ/ል የሚያስጠይቅ በሆነ ጊዜ ድርጊቶቹ እውነት የተፈጸሙ መሆኑን ጉዳዩ ለሚቀርብለት ፍርድ ቤት ለማሳመን የሚቀርቡ ሲሆን በሌላ በኩል ተከሳሽም የቀረበበትን ክስ በተመለከተ ያለመፈጸሙን ለፍርድ ቤቱ በማረጋገጥ ለማስተባበል የሚያቀርባቸው መረጃዎች ናቸው፡፡ለምሳሌ በስርቆት ወንጀል የተከሰሰ ሰው ድርጊቱን በእርግጥም ፈጽሞታል ወይስ አልፈጸመውም የሚለውን በፍርድ ቤት የሚያዝ ጭብጥ ለማስረዳት ማስረጃዎች ወሳኝ ናቸው፡፡በመሆኑም ድርጊቱን መፈጸሙን የሚያረጋግጡ የተለያዩ ማስረጃዎችን ማቅረብ የግድ ይሆናል ማለት ነው፡፡ተከሳሽም ቢሆን ድርጊቱን ያልፈጸመ መሆኑን የሚያስረዱለትን የተለያዩ ማስረጃዎችን የማቅረብ እና የማሰማት መብት አለው፡፡በመሆኑም በቀጣይ ርዕስ በጥልቀት የምንመለከተው መሆኑ እንዳለ ሆኖ ግለሰቡ ድርጊቱን ሲፈጽም የተመለከተ ሰው የሚሰጠው የምስክርነት ቃል፣ በፈጸመው መንጀል ምክንያት እጁ የገባው የወንጀል ፍሬ(ስልክ፣ ገንዘብ፣ አልባሳት ወ.ዘ.ተ)

እነኚ ማስረጃች እንደየባህርያቸው በተለያዩ መንገዶች የሚርቡ ሲሆን የሰው የምስክርነት ቃል ከሆነ ምስክሩን አቅርቦ በማሰማት፣ የሰነድ ማስረጃ ከሆነ ሰነዱን አቅርቦ ይዘቱን በማሳየት እንዲሁም በኤግዚሂቢትነት የሚቀርብ ዕቃ ከሆነ ይህንኑ ዕቃ በማቅረብ ፍርድ ቤቱ ግንዛቤ እንዲወስድ በማድረግ በጭብትነት የተያዘውን ፍሬ ነገር መኖር ለማስረዳት እና የመደምደሚያውን ትክክለኛነት ለማረጋገጥ ይቻላል፡፡

ምስክሮቹ የሰጡት ወይም የሚሰጡት ቃል፣ ከቀረበው ሰነድ ላይ ወይም ዕቃ ላይ የተወሰደው ግንዛቤ ወይም መረዳት ማስረጃ ስንለው እነኚህኑ ማስረጃዎች ፍርድ ቤት ለማቅረብ የተጠቀምንባቸው ማለትም ምስክሩ፣ ሰነዱ እና ዕቃው ማስረጃን የማቅረቢያ ዘዴ በማለት ለያይተን መመልከት እንችላለን፡፡

በሌላ በኩል ከላይ ከጠቀስነው ዝርዝር ሀሳብ አንጻር በመረጃ እና በማስረጃ መካከል ያለ ልዩነት በውል መታወቅ አለበት፡፡ኣብዛኛው የማህበረሰብ ክፍል በሁለቱ ሀረጎች መካከል ያለውን ልዩነት በውል ለይቶ አያውቀውም፡፡ ማስረጃዎች ሁሉ መረጃዎች ሲሆኑ መረጃዎች ሁሉ ግን ማስረጃ ሊሆኑ አይችሉም፡፡ማስረጃ ማለት ሰዎች ከጥናት፣ ከንባብ፣ ከሰዎች ጋር ከሚደረግ ግንኙነት፣ ቀድሞ ከነበረ እውነታ ወይም ፍሬ ነገር እና በተግባር ከተገኘ ልምድ የሚመነጭ የሰዎች እውቀት ማለት ነው፡፡እነኚ እውቀቶች ሁሉ መረጃ እንጂ ማስረጃ ላይሆኑ ይችላሉ፡፡

የማስረጃን ባህሪ ከላይ ተመልክተና::በመሆኑም መረጃዎችን በማስረጃ ደረጃ እንዲገኙ እና ከላይ ለተጠቀሰው አላማ ጥቅም ላይ ለማዋል መረጃዎቹ ተጠባጭ ወደሆነ አስረጂነት ደረጃ ከፍ እንዲሉ ለማስቻል የማስረጃ አሰባሰብ የሚጨጫወተው ሚና ጉልህ ነው ማለት ነው፡፡ለምሳሌ አቶ ለማ ከዚህ ቀደም ሰዎችን በህገ ወጥ መንገድ ወደ አረብ ሀገር ሲልክ እሰማለው ወይም ይልካ ሲባል እሰማለው የሚለውን የአቶ ምናሴን ንግግር ብንመለከት ግለሰቡ አቶ ለማ ድርጊቱን ሲፈጽም በቀጥታም ሆነ በተዘዋዋሪ የተመለከቱ ሳይሆን  ከተለያዩ ምንጮች የሰሙትን እውቀታቸውን ነው የገለጹት፡፡በመሆኑም ግለሰቡ ወ/ሉን ከመፈጸሙ በፊት ያለው ባህሪ ስለፈጸመው ወንጀል ማስረጃ ሊሆን አይችልም፡፡ይህ ማለት ግን አይጠቅምም ማለት አይደለም፡፡ ከግለሰቡ የተገኘው መረጃ በምርመራ ሂደት የሚበለጽግ ከሆነ በማስረጃነት ሊጠቅም  ይችላል፡፡ምክንያቱም ፖሊስ ከዚህ መረጃ በመነሳት በሚያደርገው የምርመራ ስራ ድርጊቱን የፈጸመው የተባለው ሰው ስለመሆኑ የሚያስረዱ ተጨባጭ ማስረጃዎችን እንዲሰበስብ ይረዱታል፡፡

ማስረጃ ተፈጸመ የተባለን ወንጀል አፈጻጸም እና መችየት፣ የፈጻሚን ማንነት፣ በወንጀል ተግባሩ የተገኘው ጥቅም እና የደረሰን ጉዳት እና የመሳሰሉትን ፍሬ ነገሮች ለማረጋገጥ የምንጠቀምበት መረጃ ነው፡፡    

2.የማስረጃ አስፈላጊነት

ማንኛውም ከሳሽ ላቀረበው ክስ ፍ/ቤት ፍትሃዊ ውሳኔ እንዲሰጥለት እና እንደ ክሱ ጥፋተኛ ይልለት ዘንድ ማስረጃዎችን በማሰማት ማሳመን አለበት፡፡ተከሳሽም የቀረበበትን ክስ ለማስተባበል እና ፍርድ ቤት በነጻ እንዲያሰናብተው(ተከላከል ከተባለ በኋላ) ማስረጃዎችን አቅርቦ ማሰማት እና ማስረዳት(ማሳመን)አለበት፡፡እንዲሁም በቀረበበት ክስ ላይ የመጀመርያ መቃወሚያ ያለው እንደሆነ መቃወሚያውን የሚያረጋግጡለትን ማስረጃዎች አቅርቦ ወይም አስቀርቦ ማስረዳት ይችላል፡፡የቅጣት ማቅለያ ምክንያቶችንም በተመሳሳይ በማቅረብ ሊያስረዳ ይችላል፡፡ፍርድ ቤቶችም የሚሰጡት የመጨረሻ ውሳኔ ተከራካሪ ወገኖች ከሚያቀርቧቸው ማስረጃዎች አንጻር የሚወስዱትን ግምት መሰረት በማድረግ ነው፡፡በመሆኑም ክስ ከመመስረቱ በፊት በቂ እና ፍርድ ቤትን ሊያሳምን የሚችል ማስረጃ ማሰባሰብ ተገቢ እና ወሳኝ ጉዳይ ነው፡፡በተለይም በወንጀል ጉዳይ ክስ የሚመሰርተው ዐቃቤ ህግ እንደመሆኑ መጠን ክስ ከመመስረቱ እና ወደ ፍርድ ቤት ከመላኩ በፊት በቂ እና ክስን ለመመስረት የሚያስችል ማስረጃ የተሰበሰበ መሆኑን ማረጋገጥ አለበት፡፡በዚህ መንገድ የተሰበሰበው ማስረጃ በፍርድ ቤት የሚቀርብ ከሆነ በክሱ ላይ የተጠቀሱት ፍሬ ነገሮች ስለመኖራቸው ማሳየት የሚቻልበት እድል ሰፊ ይሆናል፡፡ከዚህ የምንረዳው አቃቤ ህግ ክስ በሚመሰርትበትም ሆነ ፍርድ ቤቶች በቀረበላቸው ክስ ላይ ግራ ቀኙን አከራክረው እና መርምረው ውሳኔ ለመስጠት ይችሉ ዘንድ ማስረጃ የሚጫወተው ሚና የማይተካ መሆኑን ነው፡፡

የትኛውም አይነት የወንጀል ድርጊት መፈጸሙ ብቻውን ቅጣትን ለመጣል በቂ አይደልም፡፡ይልቁንም በድርጊቱ ውስጡ ያሉትን ፍሬ ነገሮች ሊያስረዳ የሚችል ከድርጊቱ ጋር በቀጥታም ሆነ ቀጥተኛ ባልሆነ መንገድ ተያያዥነት ያለው፣ በህጋዊ መንገድ የተገኘ እና ተጨባጭነት ያለው በቂ ማስረጃ ሊኖር የተገባ ነው፡፡ይህ ከሆነ የወንጀል ተግባራትን የፈጸሙ ሰዎች ከተጠያቂነት እንዳይድኑ ከተጠያቂነት ነጻ ሊሆኑ የሚገባቸው ሰዎች ነጻ መሆናቸው እንዲረጋገጥላቸው ማስረጃ ቁልፍ ሚናን ያበረክታል፡፡

3.የማስረጃ አይነት

በወንጀል ጉዳይ የሚሰበሰቡ ማስረጃዎች በጭብጥነት የተያዘ ፍሬ ነገርን ለማስረዳት ከምንጠቀምበት ዘዴ አንጻር እና ማስረጃው ሊያስረዳው ከተያዘለት አላማ አንጻር በሚል በሁለት ዋና ዋና ባህርያት ከፋፍለን መመልከት እንችላለን፡፡

ማስረጃዎች ፍሬ ነገርን ወይም የመደምደሚያውን ትክክለኝነት ለማስረዳት ከምንጠቀምበት ዘዴ አንጻር ማስረጃዎችና በሶስት ዋና ዋና ዘርፎች ከፋፍለን መመልከት እንችላለን፡፡እነኚህም የምስክርነት ማስረጃ፣ የሰነድ ማስረጃ እና ገላጭ ማስረጃ ናቸው፡፡

.የምስክርነት ማስረጃ (testimonial evidence)

ይህ አይነቱ ማስረጃ ሰዎች የአንድን ፍሬ ነገር መኖር ወይም አለመኖር ወይም የአንድን ድርጊት መፈጸም እና አለመፈጸም ወይም የአንድን ጉዳይ ድምዳሜ ትክክለኝነት በስሜት ህዋሳታቸው በመጠቀም የተረዱትን ነገር በአካል ወንጀልን ለሚመረምር አካል ወይም ለፍርድ ቤት በአካል በመቅረብ በንግግር የሚገልጹበት መንገድ ነው፡፡ በስሜት ህዋሳታቸው ስንል በአይናቸው የተመለከቱትን፣ በጆሯቸው የሰሙትን፣ በምላሳቸው የቀመሱትን፣ በአፍንጫቸው ያሸተቱትን፣ በቆዳቸው የነኩትን እና ስሜት የሰጣቸውን ነገር ማለት ነው፡፡

ከላይ እንደጠቀስነው የምስክርነት ማስረጃ በአካል በመቅረብ በንግግር ሊደረግ የሚገባ ቢሆንም ምስክሩ መናገር የተሳነው ወይም የማይችል ከሆነ ከላይ በጠቀስነው ሁኔታ ያወቀውን መረጃ በምልክት ሊገልጽ እና ገለጻው የምልክት ቋንቋን በሚያውቅ ሰው ለፍርድ ቤቱ በንግግር ሊተረጎም ይችላል፡፡ምስክሩ ለፍርድ ቤቱ የሚገልጸውን ጉዳይ በቀጥታ ወይም ቀጥተኛ ባልሆነ መንገድ ሊያስረዳ ይችላል(በቀጣዩ ክፍል ይብራል)፡፡ለምሳሌ በ ንብረትነቱ የ ለ የሆነውን ተንቀሳቃሽ ስልክ ከ ለ ኪስ ውስጥ ሲወስድ(አውጥቶ ሲወስድ) ተመልክቻለው ቢል ወይም ተ ለ የተባለውን ሰው እገድልሃው ብሎ ሲዝትበት ሰምቻለው ሲል ቃሉን ቢሰጥ ወይም ሟች አስክሬኑ በተገኘበት ክፍል አከባቢ ከሁለት ቀናት ቀደም ብሎ ጀምሮ የሞተ እንስሳ ጠረን የሸተተው መሆኑን ሊገልጽ ይችላል ይህ ግለሰቡ በቀጥታ ያገኘው መረጃ ነው፡፡ በበሌላ በኩል ፍሬ ነገሩን እራሱ በቀጥታ ሰምቶት ወይም ተመልክቶት ሳይሆን ከሌላ ሰው ሰምቶ መሆኑን ወይም ድርጊቱ ከመፈጸሙም በፊት ሆነ በኋላ ከፍሬ ነገሩ ጋር ተያያዥነት ስላለው አንድ ጉዳይ በመግለጽ ሊያስረዳ ይችላል፡፡ለምሳሌ ሟች ነብሱ ከስጋው ከመላቀቋ በፊት ስደርስ ሸ ነው የወጋኝ ብሎ እያቃተተ ሲናገር ሰምቻለው ቢል ወይም ለ ከሞተበት ጊዜ ከድቂቃዎች ቀደም ብሎ የደም እንጥብጣቢ ያለበት ሸሚዝ የለበሰ ሰው በአጠገቤ እየሮጠ አልፏል ቢል ይህ የምስክርነት ማስረጃ አካባቢያዊ ማስረጃ ነው፡፡

.የሰነድ ማስረጃ(document evidence)

የሰነድ ማስረጃ ከቃሉም እንደምንረዳው በላዩ ላይ ማንኛውም አይነት ጽሁፍ፣ምልክት፣ ስዕል ያለበት ወረቀት በአጠቃላይ በጽሁፍ የተገለጹ ማናቸውም ማስረጃዎች ወይም ድምጽ እና/ወይም  ምስል የተቀረጸበት ነገር ነው፡፡ለምሳሌ  በጽሁፍ የተደረጉ ውሎች፣ የህክምና እና ምርመራ ውጤቶች፣ በጽሁፍ የቀረቡ የፎረንሲክ ምርመራ ውጤቶች፣ ስዕሎች፣ ቻርቶች፣ የኦዲት ሪፖርቶች፣ የቴፕ እና የቪዲዮ ቅጂዎች፣ ሀሰተኛ የምስክር ወረቀቶች እና የመሳሰለት የሰነድ ማስረጃ መገለጫዎች ናቸው፡፡በመሆኑም እነኚ ማስረጃዎች የወንጀሉን ፍሬ ነገር ለማስዳት ይችላሉ፡፡

ወንጀሉ የተፈጸመው ሰነዶቹን በማቅረብ ሲሆን(ለምሳሌ-ሀሰተኛ የአሽከርካሪነት ብቃት ማረጋገጫ)፣ ድርጊቱን ሲፈጽም በካሜራ እይታ ውስጥ ሆኖ የነበረ እንደሆነ፣ ድርጊቱ ከተፈጸመ በኋላም በድርጊቱ ምክንያት የደረሰን የጉዳት መጠን እና አይነት(ለምሳሌ-አካል ጉዳት) ለመለየት እንዲሁም  ጉዳቱ ሊደርስ የቻለበትን ምክንያት(ለምሳሌ- እሳት ቃጠሎ) ሊያስረዳ የሚችል የፎረንሲክ ምርመራ የጽሁፍ መግለጫ ሁሉ የሰነድ ማስረጃዎች ናቸው፡፡

.ገላጭ ማስረጃ  (demonstrative evidence)

እነኚ ማስረጃዎች በችሎት ክርክር ወቅት ከሳሽ እና ተከሳሽ ፍርድ ቤት ተመልክቶ  ግምት እንዲወስድበት  የሚያቀርቧቸው ማስረጃዎች ናቸው፡፡ተከሳሹ የወንጀል ድርጊቱን ለመፈጸም የተጠቀመበት መሳርያ፣ በፈጸመው ወንጀል ምክንያት በእጁ ወይም በሶስተኛ ወገን እጅ የተገኙ ንብረቶች በዚህ የማስረጃ አይነት ስር የሚወድቁ ናቸው፡፡

በመሆኑም እነኚ ማስረጃዎች ፍርድ ቤት በሚቀርቡ ጊዜ ፍርድ ቤቱ በትክክልም በክሱ ላይ የተጠቀሰውን ወይም በክርክሩ የተያዘውን ጭብጥ ወይም ሊያዝ የሚገባውን መደምደሚያ ትክክለኛነት ለማረጋገጥ ይረዳዋል፡፡ለአብነትም የቀረበው ገላጭ ማስረጃ እውነትም  ድርጊቱን ለመፈጸም የሚያስችል ነው ወይስ አይደለም  ወይም በተከሳሹ ተወሰደ የተባለው እቃ በሸክም ከቦታ ወደ ቦታ ሊጓጓዝ ይችላል ወይስ አይችልም የሚለውን ጉዳይ ለመለየት ጉልህ ሚናን ያበረክታል፡፡

ሌላኛው ማስረጃው ሊያስረዳው ከታለመለት አላማ አንጻር ቀጥተኛ እና ቀጥተኛ ያልሆነ ወይም አካባቢያዊ ማስረጃ(circumstancial evidense) በሚል በሁለት ከፍለን መመልከትም እንችላለን ቀጥተኛ  በሆነ ማስረጃ እና ቀጥተኛ ባልሆነ ማስረጃ መካከል ያለውን መሰረታዊ ልዩነት ከላይ በምስክርነት ማስረጃ ስር ተመልክተናል በተጨማሪ ግን የሰነድ ማስረጃዎችም ቀጥተኛ ወይም ቀጥተኛ ያልሆኑ በሚል ከፍለን ልንመለከታቸው እንችላለን፡፡ለምሳሌ በሰዎች መካከል ስላለ ግዴታ የሚያወራ አንድ ሰነድ በአስረጀነት ቢቀርብ ይህ ማስረጃ ቀጥተኛ የሰነድ ማስረጃ ልንለው እንችላለን፡፡

ይሁንና ስለዚሁ ሰነድ በተጨባጭ የሚያወራ ሌላ ሰነድ ቢቀርብ ይህ ማስረጃ ቀጥተኛ ሊሆን አይችልም፡፡ለምሳሌ ተዋዋይ ወገኖች በገቡት ግዴታ መሰረት ገዢ ወይም ውል ተቀባይ የመጀመርያውን ክፍያ 1000 ብር በቼክ ፈጽሟል የሚል ሀረግ ቢኖር እና ቼኩ ለክፍያ በቀረበ ጊዜ በቂ ሂሳብ ያልነበረ እንደሆነ በቂ ስንቅ ሳይኖረው ባወጣው ሰው ላይ ቼኩ ቀጥተኛ የሰነድ ማስረጃ ሲሆን ውሉ ደግሞ በቼኩ ፍሬ ነገር ላይ ቀጥተኛ ያልሆነ ማስረጃ ነው፡፡

4.የማስረጃ ተገቢነት መስፈርቶች(የማስረጃ መርሆዎች)

ማስረጃ በህግ ፊት ተቀባይነት እንዲኖረው ሶስት ዋናዋና ነጥቦችን  ማሟላትአለበት፡፡ እነኚህም ነጥቦች፡-

.ከጉደዩ ጋር ግንኙነት ያለው (Relevance)

አንድን ፍሬ ነገር እንዲያስረዳ የሚቀርብ ማንኛውም ማስረጃ ከተያዘው ጉዳይ ወይም እንዲያስረዳ ከታሰበለት ፍሬ ነገር ጋር በቀጥታም ሆነ በተዘዋዋሪ ግንኙነት ሊኖረው የተገባ ነው፡፡ከጉዳዩ ጋር በየትኛውም መልኩ ተያያዥነት የሌለው ማስረጃ በህግ ፊት ዋጋ አይኖረውም፡፡

.ተዓማኒነት (Reliable)

ማንኛውም ሰው በወንጀል ክስ ተመስርቶበት ሊቀጣ የሚችለው በቂ ማስረጃዎች ቀርበው ሲገኙ ነው፡፡እነኚ ማስረጃዎች በበቂ ከማስረዳት አቅማቸው በተጨማሪ የሚታመኑ መሆን አለባቸው፡፡በየትኛውም ግለሰብ ጤነኛ አስተሳሰብ ሊታመን የማይችል ማስረጃ በማስረጃነት ሊቀርብ አይችልም፡፡የጉዳዩን አፈጻጸም ተመልክተናል የሚሉ ምስክሮች የሚገልጹት መረጃ ድርጊቱ ስለመፈጸሙ እምነት እንድንጥልበት የሚያደርጉን መሆን አለባቸው፡፡ለምሳሌ አንድን ሞተር ብስክሌት ሰርቋል በሚል  የጠመሰከረበት የ12 አመት ህጻንበሚቀርብበት ጊዜ ይህን ማስረጃ የሠጠው ምስክር ቃል ተዓማኒነቱ መመርመር አለበት፡፡ይህውምተወሰደ የተባለውን ሞተር ሳይክል ወደ ቦታው በመመለስ እያሽከረከረም ሆነ እየገፋ እንዲወስድ በማድረግ ዕውነትም ድርጊቱን ሊፈጽም የሚችል ሰው መሆኑን መገንዘብ እንችላለን፡፡በመሆኑም እቃውን ሲወስድ አይተናል የሚሉት ሰዎች ቃል ተዓማኒነት ላይኖረው ይችላል ማለት ነው፡፡ይህ በምርመራ የሚጣራ ጉዳይ ነው፡፡አንድ አንድ ጊዜ በእድሜ ወይም በጤንነት የማይጠየቁ ሰዎች ይህን ጥበቃ ምክንያት በማድረግ ሌላውን ከህግ ተጠያቂነት ለማዳን በማሰብ ያልፈጸሙትን ወንጀል ፈጽሜያለው በማለት ቃል ሊሰጡም ይችላሉ፡፡

.በህጋዊ መንገድ የተገኘ ማስረጃ (Admissablity)

ማስረጃዎች በምን አግባብ መሰብሰብ እንዳለባቸው የስነስርዓት ህጋችን በግልጽ ይደነግጋል፡፡በመሆኑም ህጉ ከሚደነግገው ወይም ግዴታ ካደረገው የምርመራ ስራ አፈጻጸም ውጪ ማስረጃን መሰብሰብ የማስረጃውን ተቀባይነት ያስቀረዋል፡፡ለምሳሌ መርማሪው ህገ ምንግስቱ በአንቀጽ 19(2) ስር የወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ህግ ስነስርዓት ህጉ በአንቀጽ 27(2) ስር በግልጽ ያስቀመጣቸውን ድንጋጌዎች በመጣስ ቃልን የተቀበለ እንደሆነ፣ ምስክሮችን የደለለ፣በማስፈራራት እና በሀይል ቃል እንዲሰጡ ያደረገ፣ያለ ፍርድ ቤት ትዕዛዝ የሰዎችን ቤት የበረበረ እና ዕቃ የያዘ እና የመሳሰሉትን ተግባራት የፈጸመ እንደሆነ በዚህ መንገድ የሠበሰበው ማስረጃ በህጋዊ መንገድ የተገኘ ባለመሆኑ ምክንያት በህግ ፊት ተቀባይነት አይኖረውም፡፡

በመሆኑም አንድ ማስረጃ በህግ ፊት ተቀባይነት ኖሮት ማንኛውም ማስረጃ በወንጀል ፍትህ አስተዳደር ውስጥ ሊጫወት የሚገባውን ሚና ይጫወት ዘንድ ከላይ የጠቀስኳቸው ነጥቦች በሚገባ ማሟላት አለበት፡፡  

4.ስለ ማስረጃ አሰባሰብ

ከላይ የማስረጃን ምንነት፣ አስፈላጊነት እና አይነት ተመልክተናል፡፡በዚህ ርዕስ ስር ደግሞ እነኚ ማስረጃዎች እንዴት ሊሰበሰቡ እንደሚገባቸው እንመለከታለን፡፡በመሰረቱ ማስረጃዎች የሚሰበሰቡት  የወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ህግ ስነ ስርዓት ባስቀመጠው ስነስርዓታዊ የህግ አግባብ መሰረት የምርመራ ስራን በሚያከናውን መርማሪ ፖሊስ አማካኝነት ነው፡፡ይህ የምርመራ ባለሙያ በተለያዩ መነሻ ምክንያቶች ምርመራን ሊያከናውን ይችላል፡፡ይህም በተበዳዩ የግል አቤቱታ አቅራቢነት የሚያስቀጡ ወንሎችን በተመለከተ የግል ተበዳይ አቤቱታውን በወ/ል ህጉ አንቀጽ 212 መሰረት ሲያቀርብ፣ በክስ አቅራቢነት የሚያስቀጡ ወንጀሎችን በተመለከተ ማንኛውም ሰው ወይም እራሱ ወይም ሌላ ማንኛውም የፖሊስ አባል በሰጠው ጥቆማ ወይም ባቀረበው ክስ መሰረት ወንጀል ስለመፈጸሙ በቂ ጥርጣሬ ሲኖረው ነው፡፡በሌላ በኩል በአሁኑ ጊዜ ፖሊስ ከዐ/ህግ ጋር በመሆን ወንጀልን በጋራ የሚያጣሩ በመሆኑ አቤቱታ ወይም ክስ ከቀረበ በኋላ ጉዳዩ የወንጀል ፍሬ ነገር ከሌለው እና ይልቁንም ጉዳዩ ፍትሃብሄር ከሆነ ወይም አስተዳደራዊ ውሳኔን ብቻ የሚጠይቅ እንደሆነ ምርመራ እንዲጀመር ከመወሰን ይልቅ ወደሚመለከተው አካል ሊመራቸው ወይም አስተያየት በመስጠት ሊያሰናብታቸው ይገባል፡፡ነገር ግን ጉዳዩ በወንጀል ህጋችንም ሆነ በተለያዩ አዋጆቻችን መሰረት የሚያስቀጣ የወንጀል ተግባር የሆነ እንደሆነ ምርመራ እንዲካሄድ ይወስናሉ፡፡

መርማሪው በዚህ መሰረት አቤቱታ ወይም ክስ ከተቀበለ በኋላ ቀጣዩ ስራ የሚሆነው አቤቱታው ወይም ክሱ የቀረበበት ጉዳይ ወይም ፍሬ ነገር እውነት የተፈጸመ ስለመሆኑ ወይም የመደምደሚያውን ትክክለኛነት የሚያስረዱ የሰው የምስክርነት ማስረጃዎችን፣ የሰነድ እና ገላጭ ማስረጃዎችን ማሰባሰብ ነው፡፡ይህ የማስረጃ አሰባሰብ መካከለኛ እና ከባድ በሆኑ ወንጀሎች ላይ የሚፈጸም ከሆነ በእቅድ መመራት እንደሚገባው ማወቅ ተገቢ ነው፡፡ምክንያቱም የምርመራ ስራው ቅደም ተከተል መዛባት እና በዘፈቀደ መሰራት ሊጠፉ የማይገቡ መሰረታዊ ማስረጃዎችን ሊያሳጣ የሚችል በመሆኑ ነው፡፡

.የምስክርነት ማስረጃ አሰባሰብ

ፖሊስ የወንጀል ምርመራውን ፍሬ ነገሮች ሊያስረዱለት ከሚችሉ ማስረጃዎች አንዱ እና በስፋት ጥቅም ላይ የሚውለው የምስክርነት ማስረጃ ነው፡፡በመሆኑም ፖሊስ ከዐቃቤ ህግ ጋር በጋራ በመሆን የወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ህግ ስነ ስርዓት አንቀጽ 30 መሰረት የግል ተበዳዩን ጨምሮ ወንጀሉ ተፈጽሟል በተባለበት እና ከወንጀል መፈጸም በኋላ ድርጊት ፈጻሚው ባለፈባቸው ወይም የወንጀል ተግባሩን በቀጠለባቸው ስፍራዎች ሆሉ ስለ ድርጊቱ በቀጥታም ሆነ በተዘዋዋሪ ሊያውቁ ይችላሉ ብሎ እምነት የጣለባቸውን ሰዎች ወይም ሙያዊ የምስክነት ቃል ሊሰጡ ይገባል ያላቸውን ባለሙያዎች በመጥራት ሊመረምራቸው ይችላል፡፡ ጥሪ የተደረገላቸው ሰዎችም በአካል ቀርበው ትክክለኛውን ወይም እውነቱን የመናገር ግዴታ አለባቸው፡፡በመሆኑም ቅደም ተከተሉን በጠበቀ መልኩ ተገቢውን ጥያቄ በመጠየቅ የሚሰጡትን ምላሽ በጽሁፍ በማስፈር ሊይዝ ይገባል፡፡በሂደቱም ከምስክሩ መረጃን ለማግኘት በማሰብ መደለል ፣ የተስፋ ቃል መስጠት፣ ማስፈራራት እና ሀይል መጠቀም የተከለከለ ነው፡፡በዚህ መንገድ የተገኘ ማስረጃም ተቀባይት የለውም ፡፡በተጨማሪም ምስክሩ ፖሊስ ለሚጠይቀው ጥያቄ መልስ የሚሰጥ ከሆነ እራሱን ተጠያቂ ሊያደርግ የሚችል ሲሆን ጥያቄውን አልመልስም የማለት መብት ያለው ስለመሆኑ ስነ ስርዓት ህጉ በአንቀጽ 30(2) ስር አስፍሮታል፡፡በመሆኑም መርማሪ ፖሊስም ይህንን መብት ሊያከብርለት ይገባል፡፡ይሁንና ይህ መብት በህግ በግልጽ ከተከለከለ መልስ ለመስጠት የሚገደድ ሲሆን በእምቢተኛነቱ ከጸና ወንጀልን አለማስታወቅ እንዲሁም ለመንግስት ስራ ትብብር ባለማድረግ ወንጀል ሊጠየቅ ይችላል፡፡ለምሳሌ በህገ ወጥ መንገድ ሰዎችን ማዘዋወር እና ስደተኞችን በህገ ወጥ መንገድ ድንበር ማሻገር አዋጅ ቁጥር 909/2007 መመልከት እንችላለን፡፡

 ለመካከለኛ እና ከባድ በሆኑ ወንጀሎች ላይ የሚደረግ የወንጀል ምርመራን በተመለከተ እንግሊዞች የሚጠቀሙትን ዘዴ እንመልከት፡፡

PEACE model

P-Preparation and planning (መዘጋጀት እና ማቀድ)

E-Engagement and explain (አቀራረብ እና መግለጽ)

A-Account (መጠይቆች)

C-Closure (መዝጊያ ወይም መደምደሚያ)

E-Evaluation (ቃለ መጠይቁን መመዘን)

መዘጋጀት እና ማቀድ-ፖሊስ ከዐ/ህግ ጋር በመሆን መካከለኛ እና ከባድ ወንጀሎችን በሚያጣራ ጊዜ የምርመራ ስራውን ከመጀመራቸው በፊት ምርመራውን በምን ሁኔታ፣ ጊዜ እና ቅደም ተከተል ሊያከናውኑት እንደሚገባ እቅድ መያዝ እና ለምርመራው የሚያስፈልጋቸውን ዘዴ፣ መሳርያ፣ ባለሙያ እና ቦታ ማዘጋጀት አለባቸው፡፡ይህም ቀድሞ በተሰበሰበው መረጃ መሰረት ከማን ምን እናገኛለን፣ ለማን ምን እንጠይቃለን፣ ተጠርጣሪው በየትኛው የምርመራ ደረጃ ላይ ሊያዝ ይገባል፣ ምርመራው የወ/ል ስፍራ ምርመራ የሚፈልግ ከሆነስ የማስረጃ ምንጮቹ በንፋስ፣በውሀ ወይም በሰው አማካኝነት ጉዳት ሳይደርስባቸው እና ህልውናቸውን ሳያጡ እንዲቆዩ ለማድረግ ምን እርምጃ መውሰድ አለብን፣ ከተጠርጣሪ የግል ባህሪ በማጥናት ያለ ስጋት በቁጥጥር ስር ማዋል ስለሚቻልበት ሁኔታ መዘጋጀት አለባቸው፡፡በዚህ መልኩ እቅድ እና ዝግጅት ተደርጎ የሚከናወን ምርመራ ምስክሮችን በተደጋጋሚ በመጥራት ከማሰልቸት፣ ጊዜን እና የመንግስት ወጪን ይቆጥባል፡፡

አቀራረብ እና ገለጻ-ምስክሮች በአዕምሯቸው አያሌ ጉዳዮችን ይዘው ነው የሚመጡት፡፡ከነኚህ ጉዳዮች የተወሰኑቱ ተከሳሹ ላይ መስክሬ ማስቀጣቴ ምን ይረባኛል የሚል ተገቢ ያልሆነ አስተሳሰብ፣ ዛሬ የምመሰክርበት ከሆነ ከእስር ሲወጣ ይበቀለኛል የሚል ስጋት፣ ምስክርነት ቃሌን ከሰጠው በተደጋጋሚ ልጠራ እና ከግል ኑሮዬ ላይ ልስተጓጎል እችላለው የሚል እና የመሳሰሉት ናቸው፡፡በመሆኑም ምስክሩ ከነዚህ አስተሳሰቦች እና ስጋቶች መጽዳት አለበት፡፡ይህን ከማድረግ አንጻር ፖሊስ በተቻለው ሁሉ እነኚ ስጋቶች የማይከሰቱ ስለመሆናቸው  ሊያስረዳው እና ዋስትና ሊሰጠው እንዲሁም በእርግጥም ችግሮቹ እንዳያጋጥሙ ሊጥር ይገባል፡፡ለምሳሌ ከስጋት አንጻር መንግስት ለምስክሮች እና ጠቋሚዎች ጥበቃ የሚያደርግበት አዋጅ ያለው መሆኑን መግለጽ ቢቻል ጥሩ ነው፡፡

ሌላኛው ነጥብ ምስክሮችን ቀለል ባለ አቀራረብ መቅረብ እና ወደ ጉዳዩ ከመግባቱ በፊትም ጠቅለል ስላለ ማህበራዊ ጉዳይ አንስቶ ለተወሰኑ ደቂቃዎች ማውራት እና በዘዴ ወደ ዋናው ጉዳይ መግባት የተሻለ ነው፡፡ይህ ከሆነ አንድም  ከምስክሩ ግላዊ ህይወት እና ከተጠርጣሪ እና ከተበዳይ ጋር ስላለው ቀረቤታ፣ ከጉዳዩ ጋር ስላለው ግንኙነት እንዴት ስለጉዳዩ ሊያውቅ እንደቻለ ለማጣራት የሚረዳ ሲሆን በሌላ በኩል ምስክሩ ሳይፈራ እና ሳይደናገጥ የሚውቀውን ሁሉ እንዲገልጽ ለማድረግ የሚያስችል መንገድ ነው፡፡ በመቀጠልም ስለ ክሱ ይዘት ማብራራት እና ከሱ ምን እንደሚፈለግ መግለጽ ይጠበቅበታል፡፡ የአገላለጽ ሁኔታው ጥንቃቄ ሊደረግበት ይገባል፡፡ምክንያቱም የምርመራ ስራውን ሊያደናቅፍም ይችላል እና ነው፡፡

የምስክርነት ማስረጃ በማሰባሰብ ስራ ውስጥ ትልቁ እና ዋነኛው ጥንቃቄ ሊደረግበት የሚገባ ጉዳይ የተሰጠው የምስክርነት ቃል በእውነት ላይ የተመሰረተ እና ማንንም ለመጉዳት ወይም ለመጥቀም ታስቦ ያልተሰጠ መሆኑን መረጋገጥ አለበት፡፡ምክንያቱም ምስክሩ በጉርሻ ተደልሎ፣ እራሱን፣ ዘመዱን፣ጓደኛውን፣ቤተሰቡን…ከተጠያቂነት ለማዳን፣ ከዚህ በፊት ከተከሳሽ ጋር በነበረው ቅራኔ ሊጎዳው ወይም ሊበቀለው በማሰብ እና በመሰሰሉት ምክንያቶች ሀሰተኛ ምስክርነት ሊሰጥ ይችላል፡፡በዚህ ረገድ ፖሊስ ምስክሩ እየሰጠ ያለው ቃል ከላይ ከጠቀስነው ችግር የጸዳ ስለመሆኑ በሚገባ የማጣራት ግዴታ አለበት፡፡ቃልን ከመቀበል በዘለለ ፖሊስ ምስክሩን ሊመረምረው ነው የሚገባው፡፡ ምክንያቱም በወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ስነ ስርዓት ህጉ አንቀጽ 30 ፖሊስ ስለሚያደርገው የምስክሮች ምርመራ ነው የሚያትተው፡፡የእንግሊዝኛውንም ቅጂ ብንመለከት Examination of witness by police ሲል ርዕስ ሰጥቶታል፡፡በመሆኑም ምስክሩ የሚሰጠውን ቃል ብቻ በጽሁፍ ከማስፈር ይልቅ ምስክሩ እየገለጸ ያለው ፍሬ ነገር እውነትነት ያለው ስለመሆኑ መመርመር አለበት፡፡

5.የምስክሩ ግዴታ

ሰዎች ምርመራ ለሚያከናውነው የፖሊስ አባል የሚሰጡት የምስክርነት ማስረጃ በትክክል ስለተመለከቱት ፣ ስለሰሙት፣ በቅምሻ፣ በማሽተት፣ በመዳሰስ ስለተገነዘቡት ጉዳይ እውነት የሆነን እና ከሀሰት የራቀን መረጃ መሆን ይጠበቅበታል፡፡ምክንቱም በሀሰት በሰጡት የምስክርነት ማስረጃ ነጻነቱ ሊረጋገጥለት ይገባ የነበረን ወንጀል ያልፈጸመ ሰው ለእስር የመዳረግ አሉታዊ ተጽዕኖ ያለው ከመሆኑ በዘለለ ማስረጃውን የሰጠው ሰው በዚህ ድርጊቱ ፍትህ እንዲዛባ ያደረገ እንደሆነ በወንጀል የሚጠየቅ መሆኑን ህጉ ይደነግጋል፡፡

መጠየቅ-ፖሊስ በመጀመርያ ደረጃን ምስክሩን መሪ ጥያቄ ሊጠይቀው አይገባም፡፡ የሚያቀርበው ጥያቄ በማብራርያ ሊመለሱ የሚገባቸው ጥያቆዎች ቢሆኑ ይመረጣሉ፡፡ግልጽ ያልሆኑ ያልተነኩ እና ሊመለሱ የሚገባቸው ጥያቄዎች ሲኖሩ በመጨረሻ በመሪ ጥያቄዎች ማጣራት ቢቻል ጥሩ ነው፡፡

ቀሪ ሁለቱ ክፍሎች ማጠቃለል እና ምዛና ወይም መለካት ናቸው፡፡

በዚህ መንገድ ምስክሩን በሚገባ ተጠይቆ የሚሰጠው ማስረጃ ከምረመራ መዝገቡ ጋር ተያይዞ መቀመጥ አለበት፡፡በተለይም ለምስክሩ ሊቀርብለት የሚገባው ጥያቄ የወንጀሉን ፍሬ ነገር ሊያረጋግጥ በሚያስችል መንገድ መሆን አለበት፡፡መቼ፣እንዴት፣ማን፣ ምን፣ በምን፣ለምን፣የቱ…፡፡የሚያውቀውን እንጂ እንዲናገር የምንፈልገውን እንዲገልጽልን መጠበቅ የለብንም

.የሰነድ ማስረጃዎች አሰባሰብ

ሰነድ ማስረጃዎች ከመንግስታዊ እና መንግስታዊ ካልሆኑ ተቋማት፣ከግል የንግድ ድርጅቶች፣ ከመንግስት ልማት ድርጅቶች፣  ከህክምና ተቋማት፣ ከፌደራል ፖሊስ የፎረንሲክ ምርመራ ዘርፍ፣ ከጥራት እና ደረጃዎች ባለስልጣን፣ ከትምህርት ተቋማት፣ ከባንክ እና ኢንሹራንስ ተቋማት ከግለሰቦች እጅ እና ከመሳሰሉት ሊሰበሰብ ወይም ሊገኝ ይችላል፡፡በመሆኑም ፖሊስ እነኚህን መረጃዎች በጥንቃቄ ሊሰበስብ እና ሊይዝ ይገባል፡፡ከጥንቃቄዎቹ መካከል ዋነኞቹ የሚሰበስበው ሰነድ በምርመራው ከተያዘው ጭብጥ ወይም ሊረጋገጥ ከታሰበው ፍሬ ነገር ጋር በቀጥታም ሆነ በተዘዋዋሪ ግንኙነት ያለው፣ አሰባሰቡም የስነስርዓት ህጉ በሚያስቀምጠው መንገድ እና የሰዎችን ህገ መንግስታዊ መብቶች ባከበረ መልኩ ሊሆን ይገባል (ህገ መንግስቱ አንቀጽ 26)፣ ማስረጃዎቹ ህጋዊ መሆናቸውን ማረጋገጥም አለበት፡፡

እነኚህ ሰነዶች የአንድን ሰው ማንነት፣ ያለውን የሙያ ብቃት እና ፍቃድ፣ የደረሰን የአካል ጉዳት ወይም ሞት እና ምክንያቱን፣ የአሳት ቃጠሎን መንስኤ፣ በባንክ ሂሳብ ውስጥ ያለን የገንዘብ መጠን፣ የምርትን የጥራት ደረጃ፣ የገንዘብ ጉድለትን የሚያሳይ የኦዲት ሪፖርት፣ ስለ ስራ ቅጥር እና ስንብት እና የመሳሰሉት ውሳኔዎች የሚያመላክቱነ የተለያዩ ኦፊሴላዊ ደብዳቤዎችን ወዘተ የሚያመላክቱ ናቸው፡፡ፍ/ቤትም እነኚ ሰነዶች የሚቀርቡለት ተመልክቷቸው ግንዛቤ እንዲወስድባቸው ነው፡፡ሌላኛው የሰዎችን እንቅስቃሴ ቀርጾ በማህደር ሊያቆይ የሚችል የስውር ካሜራ ጥቅም ላይ ውሎም ከሆነ ይህው ካሜራ የያዘውን ተንቀሳቃሽ ምስል በሰነድ ማስረጃነት መያዝ ምርመራውን ውጤታማ ያደርገዋል፡፡

አንዳንድ የወንጀል ጉዳዮች የሰነድ ማስረጃን በዋናነት መሰረት የሚያደርጉ ናቸው፡፡እነኚህን ወንጀሎች መርምሮ ፍርድ ሰጪው አካል ዘንድ ለማቅረብ እና ፍርድ ለማሰጠት የሰነዶቹ መቅረብ ወሳኝ ጉዳይ ይሆናል፡፡በሌላ በኩል የፈጸመው ተግባር በወንጀል እንደሚያስጠይቀው የሚያውቅ ወይም የገመተ ሰው ማስረጃዎቹን ሊያጠፋ እና ፖሊስ እንዳያገኛቸው ሊያደርግ ይችላል፡፡በመሆኑም ፖሊስ ልዩ ትኩረት በመስጠት ማስረጃዎቹ ወደሚገኙበት ስፍራ በፍጥነት በመሄድ ሊይዛቸው እና ሊጠብቃቸው ይገባል፡፡

ሌላኛው በሰነድ ማስረጃነት የሚቀርበው ማስረጃ ተከሳሽ በጣብያ የሚሰጠው የተከሰሽነት ቃል ነው፡፡ለዚህም የወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ስነ ስርዓት ህጉን አንቀጽ 27(2)ን መመልከት በቂ ነው፡፡በዚህ ድንጋጌ ስር ተከሳሹ ቃሉን ለመስጠት የማይገደድ ሲሆን ነገር ግን ያለምንም ጫና ወይም ተጽዕኖ በግል ፍቃደኝነቱ የሚሰጠው ቃል በማስረጃነት የሚቀርብበት መሆኑን ይደነግጋል፡፡በዚህ ረገድ ፖለስ የግለሰቦችን ህገ መንግስታዊ መብት ከማክበር አንጻር ተጠርጣሪውን እንዲናገር ወይም እንዲያምን በማንኛውም መንገድ ማስገደድ የለበትም፡፡በዚህ መንገድ የተገኘ የተከሳሽ ቃልም ተቀባይነት አይኖረውም፡፡ይልቁንም ፖሊስ ተጠርጣሪው ለተጠየቀው ጥያቄ ምላሽ ያለመስጠት ወይም ያለመናገር መብት ያለው ስለመሆኑ  ቃሉን እየሰጠ ላለው ተከሳሽ በሚረዳው ቋንቋ ሊገልጽለት ይገባል፡፡የኢፌዲሪ ህገ መንግስትም በአንቀጽ 19(2) ስር ይህንኑ የተከሳሽን መብት እና የፖሊስን ግዴታ አጣምሮ በግልጽ ይደነግጋል፡፡  

.የገላጭ ማስረጃዎች አሰባሰብ

የገላጭ ማስረጃዎችን ምንነት ከላይ ተመልክተናል፡፡እነኚህን ማስረጃዎች የወንጀል ድርጊቱ ከተፈጸመበት ስፍራ፣ ድርጊቱን በፈጸመው ሰው እጅ ላይ፣ በወንጀል የተገኘው ፍሬ ከተቀመጠበት ወይም ከተደበቀበት ስፍራ፣ እና ከመሳሰሉት ቦታ የምናገኛቸው ተጠርጣሪው ወንጀልን ለመፈጸም የተጠቀመባቸው ወይም በፈጸመው ወንጀል ምክንያት እጁ የገባ/የገቡ ንብረት/ቶች ናቸው፡፡ ፖሊስ እነኚህን ማስረጃዎች በተለያዩ መንገዶች ሊይዝ ይችላል፡፡የመጀመርያው መንገድ ከፍርድ ቤት በተገኘ የብርበራ ማዘዣ መሰረት ሲሆን ፖሊስ አንድ ሰው ወንጀል ስለመፈጸሙ እና ለዚሁ ወንጀል ማስረጃነት የሚውል ነገር ወይም እቃ በቤቱ ውስጥ ደብቋል ወይም አስቀምጧል ብሉ በበቂ ሲጠረጥር ከፍርድ ቤት የብርበራ ማዘዣ በማውጣት የተባለውን ቤት፣ የንግድ ስፍራ፣ ቅጥር ጊቢ፣ የእርሻ ስፍራ፣ተሸከርካሪ፣ መርከብ፣ አውሮፕላን እና የመሳሰሉትን ማስረጃውን ሊደበቅበት ወይም ሊቀመጥበት ይችላል ተብሎ የተጠረጠረውን ስፍራ ሁሉ መበርበር ይችላል፡፡

የብርበራ ማዘዣው የሚበረበረውን እና የሚያዘውን ማስረጃ ምንነት መግለጽ ወይም ማመላከት አለበት፡፡በመሆኑም ፖሊስ በብርበራው ማዘዣ ላይ ከተጠቀሰው ዕቃ ውጪ መበርበርም ሆነ መያዝ አይችልም፡፡ይልቁንም በማዘዣው ላይ በተመለከተው መሰረት የያዛቸውን ነገሮች ወይም ዕቃዎች ዝርዝር ገለልተኛ የሆኑ ሰዎች እንዲታዘቡት ማድረግ አለበት፡፡እንዲሁም ፍርድ ቤት በልዩ ሁኔታ ካላዘዘ በስተቀር የብርበራውን ስራ ለማከናወን ፖሊስ ሊጠቀም የሚገባው የጊዜ ገደብ በስነ ስርዓት ህጉ ላይ በተጠቀሰው መሰረት ከጠዋቱ 12፡00 ኣስከ ምሽቱ 12፡00 መሆን አለበት፡፡

በመሆኑም ማንኛውም ሰው ፖሊስ ቤቱን ለመበርበር እና በቤቱ ውስጥ የሚገኘውን ማስረጃ ለመያዝ መምጣቱን ሲገልጽለት ይህን ለማድረግ የሚያስችለው የፍርድ ቤት ትዕዛዝ የያዘ ስለመሆኑ መጠየቅ እና ያልያዘ ከሆነም ማዘዣውን ማቅረብ ካልቻለ በስተቀር በቤቱ ውስጥ ገብቶ መበርበር እንደማይችል ሊገልጽለት እና እንዳይገባ ሊከለክለው ይችላል፡፡ይህ የሚሆነው በልዩ ሁኔታ ያለ ፍርድ ቤት ትዕዛዝ ማስረጃን ለመያዝ የሚያስችለው የህግ መሰረት የሌለ እንደሆነ ነው፡፡

ሌላኛው ያለ ፍርድ ቤት ትዕዛዝ ማስረጃን መበርበር እና መያዝ ነው(search with out warrant)፡፡ከላይ እንደተመለከትነው በብርበራ ስራ ማስረጃን ለማሰባሰብ ከፍርድ ቤት የተገኘ የብርበራ ማዘዣ መቅረብ አለበት፡፡ይሁንና በልዩ ሁኔታ ፖሊስ ይህን ትዕዛዝ መያዝ ሳያስፈልገው ማንኛውም ቤትን ለመበርበር እና ማስረጃዎችን ለመያዝ የሚችልበት ሁኔታ አለ፡፡ይህም የመጀመርያው ወንጀል አድራጊው ወንጀሉን ሲፈጽም እጅ ከፍንጅ ከተያዘ ወይም ድርጊቱን ከፈጸመ በኋላ በሰዎች ክትትል ውስጥ ሆኖ ቤቱ ውስጥ ከገባ ወይም ማስረጃውን በቤቱ ውስጥ ካስቀመጠ ሲሆን ሌላኛው በወንጀል ህግ አንቀጽ 32(2) ለ ስር ባለው አግባብ ከሶስት ዓመት በላይ የሚያስቀጣ ወንጀል የፈጸመን ሰው በተመለተ በቀረበ ክስ ውስጥ በማስረጃነት ሊያገለግል የሚችል ዕቃ የተደበቀ ወይም የተቀመጠ መሆኑን በበቂ ከጠረጠረ ይሁንና ፖሊስ ከፍርድ ቤት የብርበራ ትዕዛዙን እስከሚያወጣ ድረስ ማስረጃው(እቃው) ከቦታው ሊነሳ ወይም ሊወሰድ ይችላል ብሎ ከጠረጠረ የፍርድ ቤት ማዘዣውን መያዝ ሳያስፈልገው ሊበረብር እና ሊይዝ ይችላል፡፡ከዚህ ውጪ በሆነ ማንኛውም ህግን መሰረት ያላደረገ የብርበራ ስራ የተሳተፈን የፖሊስ አባል በተመለከተ ማንኛውም ሰው ለሚመለከተው አካል በማስታወቅ ወይም በማመልከት ተገቢው የማጣራት ስራ እንዲሰራ እና እርምጃ እንዲወሰድ የማድረግ መብት አለው፡፡

እነኚህ ንብረቶች ፍርድ ቤት ጉዳዩን መርምሮ የመጨረሻ ውሳኔ አስኪሰጥ በመንግስት እጅ የሚቆዩ ሲሆኑ በስተመጨረሻ ለትክክለኛው ባለሀብት ወይም ባለይዞታ እንዲመለስ፣ ለመንግስት ገቢ እንዲሆን ወይም ድጋሚ አገልግሎት ላይ እንዳይውሉ ወይም እንዲወገዱ ሊወሰን የሚችልቸው ናቸው፡፡ገላጭ ማስረጃዎች እንደየባህሪያቸው ሊያዙ ይገባል፡፡ በቅድሚያ ግን እነኚ ቁሶች ቁጥር ተሰጥቷቸው በአይነት፣በብዛት እና በይዘት ተገልጸው ተጠያቂነትን በሚያሰፍን መልኩ መቀመጥ አለባቸው፡፡

ገላጭ ማስረጃዎች በቀላሉ ሊበላሹ የሚችሉ እንደ ፍራፍሬ እና ጥራጥሬ ያሉ ነገሮች ከሆኑ በመቆየታቸው ምክንያት ከአልግሎት ውጪ የሚሆኑ ከሆነ በፎቶ ግራፍ በማንሳት ወይም በምስል መቅረጽ በመቅረጽ በአስቸኳይ ተሽጠው ከሽያጩ የተገኘው ገንዘብ ጉዳዩ የመጨረሻ ውሳኔ እስከሚያገኝ ድረስ በባንክ እንዲቀመጥ ሊደረግ ይገባል(የኤግዚቢት አያያዝ እና አቆያየት ማንዋል)፡፡

6.ቤቱ የሚበረበርበት እና ማንኛውም ሰው ግዴታ

ማንኛውም ሰው የእለት ተእለት ኑሮውን ለመምራት በሚያደርገው እንቅስቃሴ ውስጥ የሌሎችን ሰላማዊም ሆነ የወንጀል እንቅስቃሴዎችን የመመልከት ወይም የመስማት እድል አለው፡፡ፖሊስም የወንጀል ምርመራ ስራውን ውጤታማ ለማድረግ የህዝብ ተሳትፎ ቁልፍ ሚና የሚጫወት በመሆኑ ማንኛውም ሰው በወንጀል ጉዳይ ማስረጃ ሊሆኑ የሚችሉ በህገወጥ መንገድ የተገኙ ማናቸውንም ቁሶች ሲደበቁ፣ ለሌላ ሰው ሲተላለፉ ወይም ሲሸሹ የተመለከተ እንደሆነ ለፖሊስ በመጠቆም ማስረጃውን ከመጥፋት እና ያለአግባብ የህገወጦች መበልጸጊያ ከመሆን የመጠበቅ ሀላፊነት አለበት፡፡በተጨማሪም ፖሊስ ማስረጃዎቹን ለማግኘት ዝግጅት ላይ መሆኑን ለተጠርጣሪው ከማሳወቅ መቆጠብ አለበት፡፡በሌላም በኩል ፖሊስ ብርበራውን በሚያከናውንበት ጊዜም ለስራው መፍቀድ እና ተገቢውን ትብብር ማድረግ ይጠበቅበታል፡፡ተገቢውን ትብብር ሲባል በርን ከፍቶ በፍቃደኝነት ከማስገባት የሚጀምር ሲሆን በተቃራኒው የብርበራ ስራውን በየትኛውም ምክንያት ለማደናቀፍ በማሰብ ተቃውሞ ከገጠመ ፖሊስ ብርበራውን ለማድረግ እስከሚችለበት ድረስ ሀይልን መጠቀም የሚችል ስለመሆኑ ስነስርዓት ህጉ ይደነግጋል፡፡                      

7.የወንጀል ስፍራ ምርመራ(crime scene investigation)

ፖሊስ በወንጀል ምርመራ ሂደት ውስጥ ማስረጃ ከሚሰበስብባቸው መንገዶች አንዱ የወንጀል ስፍራ ምርመራ ነው፡፡ይህ ምርመራ የሚከናወነው ወንጀል በተፈጸመበት ስፍራ ፖሊስ በአካል በመገኘት ማስረጃ በመሰብሰብ ነው፡፡የወንጀል ስፍራ ወንጀል የተፈጸመበትን መሬትን ፣የውሃ አካልን ፣ መርከብን፣ መኪናን፣ የደን ክልልን እና የመሳሰሉትን ሊያካትት ይችላል፡፡

የምርመራ ስራው የሚከናወነው በአብዛኛው ወንጀሉ በተፈጸመ ቅጽበት እንደመሆኑ መጠን የወንጀል ምርመራ ቡድኑ የመጀመርያ ስራ በድርጊቱ ጉዳት የደረሰባቸውን ሰዎች ለይቶ ማወቅ፣ መታደግ እና እንክብካቤ ወደሚያገኝበት ቦታ መውሰድ ሲሆን በሌላም በኩል ተጠርጣሪውን ከአከባቢው ሳይርቅ በቁጥጥር ስር ማዋል ነው፡፡ቀጥሎም በስፍራው የነበሩ እና ለምስክር ማስረጃነት የሚፈልጋቸውን በመለየት ማንነታቸውን መለየት፣ማስታወሻ መያዝ እና የሚቻል ሲሆን የምስክርነት ቃል መቀበል አለበት፡፡ ይህ ከተከናወነ በኋላ ማስረጃዎችን ለማሰባሰብ ይረዳል ተብሎ አስከሚታሰብበት የመሬት ስፋት ድረስ በመከለል ሰዎች ወደ ስፍራው እንዳይገቡ መከልከል እና ቀድሞ ውስጥ የነበሩ ሰዎችን ማንነት በሚገባ መለየት እና ማስታወሻ መያዝ ቀጣዩ ተግባር ነው፡፡ይህ የሚደረግበት ምክንያት አንድ አንድ ማስረጃዎች በባህርያቸው በሰዎች የእጅ እና እግር ንክኪ ሊበላሹ እና ድጋሚ ላይገኙ የሚችሉ(ለምሳሌ- እንደ ጣት አሻራ ያሉ የፎረንሲክ ምርመራ ናሙናዎች) በመሆናቸው እና በስፍራው የነበሩ ሰዎችም ከወንጀል ስፍራው ጋር ንክኪ ስለሚኖራቸው የማመሳከር ስራው ላይ አሻራቸው ሊገኝ የሚችል በመሆኑ ነው፡፡

በተለይም እንደ ህገ ወጥ የሰዎች ዝውውር እና ስደተኞችን በህገወጥ መንገድ ድንበር ማሻገር ወንጀል ያሉ ሰፊ የወንጀል ስፍራ ምርመራ የሚፈልጉ ወንጀሎች ማስረጃዎቹ ሊጠፉ የሚችሉበት እድል ሰፊ በመሆኑ የፎረንሲክ ምርመራ ባለሙያዎች ማስረጃዎችን ለመሰብሰብ የሚረዱትን መሳርያዎች በመያዝ ከወንጀል ምርመራ ፖሊስ አባሉ ጋር አብሮ መጓዝ እና ለምርመራ ስራ ግብዓትነት የሚጠቅሙትን የማስረጃ ናሙናዎች መለየት እና መጠቆም እንዲሁም መሰብሰብ ያስፈልጋል፡፡ይህ ማስረጃ ሳይነሳ ቀርቶ ለህዝብ ክፍት ከሆነ በኋላ መልሶ ማግኘት የማይቻል በመሆኑ ባለሙያው ማስረጃዎቹን ወይም ናሙናዎቹን በእርግጠኝነት እና ምንም ባለማስቀረት ያነሳቸው ስመሆኑ ርግጠኛ መሆን አለበት፡፡

በፎረንሲክ ምርመራ ስራ ውስጥ ከወንጀል ስፍራ የሚገኝ ደም፣ ሽንት፣ የዘር ፈሳሽ፣ጸጉር እና የመሳሰሉት ማስረጃን ለማግኘት የሚጠቅሙን ናሙናዎች ናቸው፡፡ 

8.ከምህበረሰቡ ምን ይጠበቃል?

ወንጀል በተፈጸመባቸው አከባቢዎች ያሉ ማናቸውም ሰዎች ወንጀል መፈጸሙን እንደተመለከቱ ለፖሊስ አባል ማሳወቅ ያለበት ሲሆን ፖሊስ ወደ ስፍራው እስኪመጣ እና አስፈላጊ የሆኑ የማስረጃ ማሰባሰብ ስራዎችን እስኪያጠናቅቅ ድረስ ወንጀል ወደተሰራበት ግቢ እና ቤት ወይ ማንኛውም ስፍራ ለመግባት አለመሞከር እና ሌሎችም ወደዚህ ስፍራ እንዳይገቡ በመከልከል የበኩሉን ሚና ማበርከት አለበት፡፡ለአብነትም የንግድ ሱቁ ተሰብሮ ንብረቱ የተሰረቀበት ሰው ወይም ይህንኑ የተመለከተ ማንኛውም ሰው ወደ ሱቁ ከመግባት፣ የበሩን እጀታ እና አካል እንዲሁም በክፍሉ ውስጥ የሚገኙ ቁሳቁሶችን ከመንካት መቆጠብ አለበት፡፡ምክንያቱም ፖሊስ የሚፈልገውን ማስረጃ የማግኘት እድሉ እንዲጠብ የሚያደርግ በመሆኑ ነው፡፡በመሆኑም ከህብረተሰቡ የሚጠበቀው በአካል እና በህይወቱ እንዲሁም በንብረቱ ላይ ወይም እኚው ጉዳቶች በሌላ ሰው ላይ ደርሶ ሲመለከት፣ ማንኛውንም ወንጀል የተፈጸመ መሆኑን ሲያይ ወይም ሲጠረጥር የወንጀል መርማሪ ፖሊስ እንዲያውቀው ማድረግ እና አከባቢውን ከራስም ሆነ ከሌሎች ንክኪ መጠበቅ አለበት፡፡

ፖሊስም ሙያዊ የምርመራ ቴክኒክ በመጠቀም አስፈላጊውን ጥንቃቄ በማድረግ ተፈጸመ ለተባለው ወንጀል ማስረጃ በመሆን ፍርድ ቤት መቅረብ ይችላሉ፤የወንጀሉንም ፍሬ ነገር ያረጋግጣሉ ብሎ ያሰበውን የማስረጃ ምንጭ አጠቃልሎ ምንም ነገር አለማስቀረቱን እርግጠኛ በመሆን ይሰበስባል፣በጥንቃቄ ይይዛል፣ናሙናው ወይም አሻራው ወደሚመረመርበት ስፍራ በጥንቃቄ ያጓጉዛል፣ ምርመራው እንደተጠናቀቀም ውጤቱን በጽሁፍ ደግፎ ከምርመራ መዝገቡ ጋር ያያዛል፡፡በመቅድሙ ላይም ይህንኑ ማስፈር ይጠበቅበታል፡፡በተለይም የእሳት ቃጠሎ፣ የሰው ግድያ፣ የተከለከሉ ዕጾችን በግል መጠቀም እና/ወይም ማዟዟር፣ ህገ ወጥ የሠዎች ዝውውር እና የመሳሰሉት የፎረንሲክ ምርመራ የሚፈልጉ ወንጀሎች በዚህ መልኩ ሊመረመሩ ይገባል፡፡

በዚህ መሰረት በወንጀል ስፍራ ምርመራ ወቅት ለሞት የተዳረገ ሰው ካለ አስክሬኑ ወደ ሆስፒታል እንዲላክ በማድረግ እና ውጤቱን በመከታተል በማስረጃነት መያዝ አለበት፡፡በዚህም ረገድ የህክምና ባለሙያዎች ከተራ አካል ጉዳት አንስቶ እስከ ሞት ሊደርስ የሚችልን የጉዳት መጠን በገለልተኝነት በመመርመር የምርመራውን ውጤት ሚስጥራዊነቱን በጠበቀ መልኩ ለምርመራ ክፍሉ መላክ አለበት፡፡

9.የማስረጃ አቀራረብ

ከላይ ለመመልከት እንደሞከርነው ፖሊስ ከዐ/ህግ ጋር በጋራ በመሆን የማስረጃ ማሰባሰብ እና ምርመራ ስራ ካጠናቀቀ በኋላ ማስረጃዎቹን ይመዝናል፡፡በምዘናውም መሰረት የቀረበው ማስረጃ/ዎች በተከሳሹ ላይ ክስ ለመመስረት የማያስችል ከሆነ በቂ ማስረጃ ያልቀረበ መሆኑን በመጥቀስ በወ/መ/ስ/ስ/ህ ቁጥር 42(1) ሀ መሰረት መዝገቡን የሚዘጋ ሲሆን ነገር ግን ማስረጃው የተያዘውን ጭብጥ ፍሬ ነገር ለማረጋገጥ ይችላሉ ብሎ ሲያምን የተላለፈውን የህግ ድንጋጌ በመጥቀስ ክስ ይመሰርታል፡፡ቀጥሎም ክሱን ለመመልከት ስልጣኑ ላለው ፍርድ ቤት ይልካል፡፡

ዐ/ህግ ከክሱ ጋር አያይዞ ያቀረባቸውን የማስረጃ ዝርዝሮች በክርክር ወቅት የሚያቀርበው ተከሳሽ ክሱ ተነቦለት እና የመጀመርያ ደረጃ መቃወሚያ እና በመቃወሚያው ላይ ዐ/ህግ የሰጠውን መልስ ተከትሎ ፍርድ ቤቱ ብይን ሲሰጥ ክሱ እንዲቀጥል የወሰነ እንደሆነ እና የእምነት ክህደት ቃሉን ተጠይቆ በከፊልም ሆነ በሙሉ ክዶ የተከራከረ እንደሆነ ነው፡፡እዚ ላይ ልብ ልንል የሚገባው ጉዳይ ተከሳሽ የተከሰሰበትን አንድ ነጠላ ክስ በተመለከተ ከፊሉን ፍሬ ነገር አምኖ ሌላውን የካደ እንደሆነ ባመነው ላይ ውሳኔ ተሰጥቶ በካደው ላይ ደግሞ ምስክር ሊሰማ የማይቻል መሆኑን ነው፡፡ምክንያቱም ፍርድ ቤት ማስረጃ ማሰማት ሳያስፈልገው የጥፋተኛነት ውሳኔ ሊሰት የሚችለው ተከሳሹ የተከሰሰበትም ወንጀል ስለመፈጸሙ በሙሉ ያመነ እንደሆነ ነው ሲል የወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ስነ ስርዓት ህጉ በአንቀጽ 134(1) ስር ይደነግጋል፡፡

በዚህ አግባብ ተከሳሹ ክሱን የካደ ከሆነ የማስረዳት ሸክሙ የዐቃቤ ህጉ ይሆናል፡፡ምክንያቱም የመሰረተውን ክስ ፍሬ ነገር የማስረዳት እና የመደምደሚያውን ትክክለኝነት የማረጋገጥ ግዴታ አለበት፡፡የማስረዳት ሸክም ወደ ተከሳሹ ሊተላለፍ የሚችለው በመጀመርያ ዐ/ህጉ ባቀረበው ማስረጃ እንደ ክሱ እና በበቂ ማስረዳት የቻለ እንደሆነ ነው፡፡ይሁንና እንደ ሙስና(ምንጩ ያልታወቀ ገቢ) እና ህገ ወጥ የሰዎች ዝውውር እና ስደተኞችን በህገወጥ መንገድ ድንበር ማሻገር ያሉ ወንጀሎች ካላቸው ልዩ ባህሪ አንጻር ዐ/ህግ መሰረታዊ ፍሬ ነገሮችን(fundamental facts) አቅርቦ ማሳየት ከቻለ የማስረዳት ሸክሙ ወደ ተከሳሽ ይዞራል፡፡ለምሳሌ በአነስተኛ ወርሀዊ ደሞዝ የሚተዳደር የመንግስት ሰራተኛ ከፍተኛ ዋጋ ያለው ሀብት በእጁ ያደረገ እንደሆነ ዐ/ህግ ማስረዳት የሚጠበቅበት ተከሳሹ በወር የሚያገኘውን የደሞዝ ክፍያ መጠን እና በእጁ የተገኘውን የሀብት መጠን ነው፡፡ይህን ስንመለከት ዐ/ህጉ በሌሎች ወንጀሎች ላይ የሚጠበቅበትን በበቂ የማስረዳት ግዴት እንዲወጣ አይጠበቅበትም ማለት ነው፡፡በመሆኑም የማስረዳት ሸክሙ የተላለፈበት ተከሳሽ ንብረቱን ከየት እንዳመጣው ወይም እንዴት ሊያፈራው እንደቻለ የማስረዳት ግዴታ አለበት፡፡ዐ/ህግ ንብረቶቹን በህገ ወጥ መንገድ ማፍራቴን በበቂ አላስረዳምና በነጻ ልሰናበት ይገባል የሚል ጥያቄ ቢያቀርብ ተቀባይነት አይኖረውም ማለት ነው፡፡

ወደ መደበኛው የወንጀል አይነት የማስረጃ አቀራረብ ስርዓት ስንመለስ ዐ/ህግ ያቀረበውን ክስ ፍሬ ነገር የሚያስረዱለትን የምስክርነት፣ የሰነድ እና የገላጭ ማስረጃዎች ለፍርድ ቤቱ አቅርቦ ያሰማል ወይም ዕንዲመለከቱት ያደርጋል ፡፡በመሆኑም በምርመራ ወቅት የተሰበሰቡትን ማስረጃዎች እንደ አመቺነቱ ወይም ክሱን በተደራጀ እና በተሳሰረ ቅደም ተከተል ሊያስረዱለኝ ይችላሉ ብሎ ባሰበው መንገድ የማሰማት እና ገላጭ ማስረጃዎችም በችሎት ቀርበው ፍርድ ቤቱ እንዲመለከታቸው ማድረግ ያጠበቅበታል፡፡ገላጭ ማስረጃዎቹ ባላቸው ልዩ ባህሪ በችሎት መቅረብ የማይችሉ ከሆነ ምስላቸውን በፎቶግራፍ በማስደገፍ እንደሁም ከብዙ በጥቂቱ የማስረጃውን ናሙና በማስቀረብ ለፍርድ ቤቱ ያሳያል፡፡

እነኚህ ማስረጃዎች ቀርበው ግራ ቀኙ ከተከራከሩ በኋላ ማስረጃው በክሱ ውስጥ የተጠቀሱትን ፍሬ ነገሮች በበቂ ያስረዳ የሆነ እንደሆነ ተከሳሽ የመከላከያ ማስረጃውን አቅርቦ እንዲያሰማ እና ክሱን እንዲያስተባብል እንዲከላከል ብይን የተሰጠ መሆኑን ፍርድ ቤቱ ይገልጽለታል፡፡ተከሳሽም ዐ/ህግ የራሱን ምስክሮች ሲያሰማ የተጠቀመበትን የህግ ስነስርዓት በመጠቀም ማስረጃዎቹን አቅርቦ ያሰማል፡፡


v ማስረጃ ማለት ፍሬ ነገርን ወይም በጭብጥነት የተያዘን ጉዳይ መኖር አለመኖርን ውሳኔ በተመለከተ ውሳኔ ለሚሰጠው የዳኝነት አካል ለማሳመን በማሰብ የሚቀርብ መረጃ ነው

v በሌላ በኩል ከላይ ከጠቀስነው ዝርዝር ሀሳብ አንጻር በመረጃ እና በማስረጃ መካከል ያለ ልዩነት በውል መታወቅ አለበት          

v ክስ ከመመስረቱ በፊት በቂ እና ፍርድ ቤትን ሊያሳምን የሚችል ማስረጃ ማሰባሰብ ተገቢ እና ወሳኝ ጉዳይ ነው      

v ማስረጃ ፍሬ ነገሮች ሊያስረዳ የሚችል ከድርጊቱ ጋር በቀጥታም ሆነ ቀጥተኛ ባልሆነ መንገድ ተያያዥነት ያለው፣

v ማስረጃ በህጋዊ መንገድ የተገኘ እና ተጨባጭነት ያለው በቂ በወንጀል ጉዳይ የሚሰበሰቡ ማስረጃዎች በጭብጥነት የተያዘ ፍሬ ነገርን ለማስረዳት ከምንጠቀምበት ዘዴ አንጻር እና ማስረጃው ሊያስረዳው ከተያዘለት አላማ አንጻር በሚል በሁለት ዋና ዋና ባህርያት ከፋፍለን መመልከት እንችላለን፡፡ማስረጃ ሊኖር የተገባ ነው፡፡      

v ፍሬ ነገርን ለማስረዳት ከምንጠቀምበት ዘዴ አንጻር ማስረጃዎችን የሰው ምስክርነት፣ የሰነድ፣ የገላጭ በሚል ከፋፍለን መመልከት እንችላለን፡፡

v በሌላ መልኩ ማስረጃዎችን ቀጥተኛ ወይም ቀጥተኛ ያልሆነ በሚል  ሊከፋፈልም ይችላል፡፡    

v ምስክርነት ማለት ሰዎች በስሜት ህዋሳታቸው በመጠቀም የተረዱትን ነገር በአካል ወንጀልን ለሚመረምር አካል ወይም ለፍርድ ቤት በአካል በመቅረብ በንግግር የሚሰጡት ማስረጃ ነው፡፡

v ምስክሮች ስለሰሙት፣ በቅምሻ፣ በማሽተት፣ በመዳሰስ ስለተገነዘቡት ጉዳይ እውነት የሆነን እና ከሀሰት የራቀን መረጃ መስጠት ይጠበቅባቸዋል፡፡

v የሰነድ ማስረጃ ማንኛውም አይነት ጽሁፍ፣ምልክት፣ ስዕል ያለበት ወረቀት በአጠቃላይ በጽሁፍ የተገለጹ ማናቸውም ማስረጃዎች ወይም ድምጽ እና/ወይም  ምስል ተቀረጸበት ነገር ነው፡፡

v የሰነድ ማስረጃዎች የደረሰን የአካል ጉዳት ወይም ሞት እና ምክንያቱን፣ የአሳት ቃጠሎን መንስኤ፣ በባንክ ሂሳብ ውስጥ ያለን የገንዘብ መጠን፣ የምርትን የጥራት ደረጃ፣ የገንዘብ ጉድለትን የሚያሳይ የኦዲት ሪፖርት፣ ስለ ስራ ቅጥር እና ስንብት እና የመሳሰሉት ውሳኔዎች የሚያመላክቱነ የተለያዩ ኦፊሴላዊ ደብዳቤዎችን ወዘተ የሚያመላክቱ ናቸው፡፡

v እነኚ ማስረጃዎች በችሎት ክርክር ወቅት ከሳሽ እና ተከሳሽ ፍርድ ቤት ተመልክቶ  ግምት እንዲወስድበት  የሚያቀርቧቸው

v ተከሳሹ የወንጀል ድርጊቱን ለመፈጸም የተጠቀመበት መሳርያ፣ በፈጸመው ወንጀል ምክንያት በእጁ ወይም በሶስተኛ ወገን እጅ የተገኙ ንብረቶች በዚህ የማስረጃ አይነት ስር የሚወድቁ ናቸው፡፡

v ፖሊስ ክሱ የቀረበበት ጉዳይ ወይም ፍሬ ነገር እውነት የተፈጸመ ስለመሆኑ ወይም የመደምደሚያውን ትክክለኛነት የሚያስረዱ የሰው የምስክርነት ማስረጃዎችን፣ የሰነድ እና ገላጭ ማስረጃዎችን ማሰባሰብ ነው፡፡

v የወንጀል ስፍራ ምርመራ ወንጀል በተፈጸመበት ስፍራ ፖሊስ በአካል በመገኘት ማስረጃ የሚያሰባስቡት መንገድ ነው፡፡የወንጀል ስፍራ ወንጀል የተፈጸመበትን መሬትን ፣የውሃ አካልን ፣ መርከብን፣ መኪናን፣ የደን ክልልን እና የመሳሰሉትን ሊያካትት ይችላል፡፡

v ከማስረዳት ሸክም አንጻር ዐ/ህግ በመሰረተው ክስ ላይ ተከሳሽ ክዶ የተከራከረ እንደሆነ የተያዘውን ጭብጥ የማስረዳት ግዴታ አለበት፡፡ተከሳሽ የማስረዳት ሸክሙ የሚተላለፍበት ዐ/ህጉ እንደ ክሱ በበቂ ያስረዳ እንደሆነ ነው፡፡

v  ነገር ግን ከወንጀሉ ልዩ ባህሪ በመነሳት በህግ በግልጽ ሲወሰን የማስረዳት ሸክም ወደ ተከሳሹ ሊያልፍ ይችላል፡፡ዐ/ህግ የሚጠበቅበት መሰረታዊ ፍሬ ነገሮችን ማቅረብ ብቻ ይሆናል፡፡


Collection and presentation of evidence in criminal cases

Collection and presentation of evidence in criminal cases

=======. Education for Consciousness. =========


The main purpose of criminal law is to keep the public safe. Thus, in the course of their daily lives, people have a constitutional right to respect and refrain from violating the rights of others. However, if they violate this obligation, they may violate the rights of others, including criminal, civil, and administrative law and human rights.

 Administrative law and human rights enforcement

It has been repeatedly stated that as the power of the state expands, it is against the rights and freedoms of citizens. Administrative law recognizes the importance of authority. Effective governance and efficient service delivery are needed, not just tyranny. However, power that deviates from the law and the constitution weighs the benefits. Arbitrary actions, such as ‘I can do whatever I want, I can do whatever I want!’, Undermine the basic right to live, move freely, to speak, to express one’s opinion, and to own property.

The role of administrative law in protecting human rights clearly illustrates the connection between the two. In order to better understand the positive impact of the law on the protection and implementation of human rights, it is appropriate to analyze the government’s commitment to human rights. These roles are to protect respect and enforcement.

First, the role of government in respecting rights restricts interference from any part of the government when citizens exercise their rights freely. Especially in the so-called basics of living, writing, speaking; To follow the religion of your choice; The rights and freedoms of freedom of movement and property are guaranteed in practice when the government raises its hand. These rights are determined by the government, particularly by the executive and its subordinate administration; Order: They may be endangered by rules and regulations. As the Constitution is the supreme law, not all laws, decisions and practices that contradict this will be enforced. Such a question of constitutionality does not fall into the category of administrative law. However, the question of what constitutes a constitution is more likely to be covered by the administrative law framework.

If a directive issued by a governing body violates the human rights of citizens beyond the power of attorney given by the legislature, it is a matter of constitutionality, but it is a matter of legality that must be addressed by the administrative law. To better understand the difference, let’s look at the following instructions from the former Ministry of Revenue and the current Revenue and Customs Authority.

No customs officer can strike or strike.

The right to peaceful assembly is guaranteed by the FDRE Constitution. Article 30, sub-paragraph 1, which gives him the right, reads as follows:

Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

When a directive is issued by the executive, there must be a clear delegate from the legislature. The directive is beyond the scope of the power of attorney (Ulta vires). It is therefore null and void before the law. When the Ministry of Revenue issued this directive, the proclamation to establish the source of power and the decision of the Customs Authority. 368/1995 refers to Article 8 (2) (c). This legal provision reads as follows.

The Ministry of Police, assigned by the Federal Police Commission to enforce customs law, shall operate in accordance with the directives issued by the Federal Police Proclamation. Manages. When disaster strikes, he dismisses it.

This article does not authorize the Ministry of Revenue to prohibit customs officers from conducting peaceful demonstrations. This directive, issued without the explicit authorization of the House of Representatives, is neither valid nor enforceable. Administrative law enforces the government’s obligation to respect human rights by enforcing such directives in various ways to prevent the violation of citizens’ rights and freedoms.

Government enforcement responsibilities are often social; It is directly related to economic and cultural rights. It is not enough for the government not to interfere in the rights of citizens or to raise its hand. If he does not provide basic services to the citizen, such as health, electricity, water, roads, etc., he will not be free.

The relationship between administrative law and human rights can also be examined in terms of the government’s obligation to enforce it. In this regard, the government must strengthen its legal and institutional control mechanisms to ensure that human rights are not violated, and that it has a system in place to ensure immediate justice for victims of human rights abuses. In short, in order for human rights to be respected, the government needs to formulate, establish, and develop a well-developed administrative law and administrative system.

We can look at our various laws to see if action should be taken.

Depending on the nature of the case, these actions may be taken to court or to administrative or executive bodies.

The provisions of Article 79 (1) of the Constitution indicate that the courts have the power to adjudicate on criminal charges.

Courts, therefore, can only accept and prosecute cases when there is sufficient evidence to prove the case. In criminal cases, there are major issues that must be addressed before the courts can handle the case. These are criminal investigations and prosecutions.

Therefore, if the police are to appear in court in order to educate the perpetrator and the perpetrators of such an act by prosecuting a person suspected of committing an act in a joint investigation with the prosecutor, the defendant must carefully gather evidence and organize an investigation.

A significant number of members of the public have been involved in a number of cases, ranging from a lack of awareness and a lack of compliance with the law to a cover-up.

However, since investigations cannot be effective without the participation and cooperation of the public, the public must be able to support the evidence-gathering system in the eyes of the government, from exposing illegal activities to providing information and evidence to the investigator.

In this article, we will try to explore the basics of how police collect and present evidence, the nature and importance of evidence, the acceptance of evidence, the role of the public, and the concept of evidence.

1. The nature of criminal evidence

Although our laws contain a number of provisions regarding evidence, we do not consider it to be a definitive definition of evidence. Therefore, it is important to look at the interpretation given by various legal experts to understand the nature of evidence.

Richard May, a lawyer, is the source of evidence that can be used to prove or disprove any facts or conclusions. 

They say it is information.

Evidence can, on the other hand, be interpreted as evidence to convince the judging panel of the existence of a substance or a matter of fact.

Evidence from these interpretations is that when a person violates the law by failing to do something, or when it is obligatory to do so, he or she will be able to prove to the court that the action was true, and the defendant will prove to the court that he or she did not do so. Evidence is important to prove in court whether a person accused of theft has actually committed the act or not. Therefore, it is necessary to present a variety of evidence to prove that the act was committed. The defendant also has the right to present and present evidence to prove his or her innocence. Although we will look at the subject in more detail, the testimony of the person who witnessed the act, the consequences of the crime (telephone, money, clothing, etc.).

These facts are varied according to their nature, and if the evidence is human, it can be presented by presenting the witness, presenting the document if the evidence is present, and if it is an exhibit, it can be used to explain the existence of the facts and prove the conclusion.

The evidence given by the witnesses, the evidence or understanding taken from the document or object, can be used to identify the evidence that the witness, the document and the object are used to present in court.

On the other hand, in the light of the above, the difference between information and evidence must be clearly identified. Most sections of society do not fully recognize the difference between the two phrases. Evidence is all information, but not all information can be evidence. Evidence is human knowledge that comes from research, reading, relationships, past facts or experience, and experience. All of this knowledge can be information, not evidence. ፡ Searching

We have already seen the nature of evidence. Therefore, the role of evidence collection is crucial to enable the information to be available as evidence and to be used for the above purposes. For example, I have heard Lemma send people illegally to Arab countries in the past. If we look at Mr. Manasseh’s statement that he is listening, he did not directly or indirectly see Mr. Lemma committing the act, but he did express his knowledge from various sources. Therefore, the behavior of the individual before committing the crime cannot be evidence of a crime. ፡ Searching If the information from the individual is enriched during the investigation, it can be used as evidence because the police will use this information to gather evidence that the alleged perpetrator is the perpetrator.

Evidence is information that we use to verify the facts of a crime, the identity of the perpetrator, the benefits and harms of the crime, and so on.

2. The importance of evidence

Any plaintiff must be persuaded by a court of law to give a fair verdict and be found guilty. The defendant must present evidence and convince the court to dismiss the case and acquit him / her free of charge. He can provide evidence to support the objection if he has a preliminary objection. He can also state the reasons for the mitigation of sentences. The final decision of the courts is based on the assumptions of the parties. Therefore, it is sufficient to convince the court before prosecuting. Gathering relevant evidence is appropriate and important. In particular, as a prosecutor in a criminal case, he or she must ensure that sufficient evidence is available before prosecuting and sending him or her to court. If the evidence is presented in court in this way, There is a good chance that there will be facts. From this we understand that evidence plays an irreplaceable role in the prosecution’s case and in the courts’ decision-making process.

It is not enough to commit any crime alone. Instead, there must be sufficient evidence that is directly or indirectly related to the act, legally available and substantiated to explain the facts of the case. In this case, the perpetrators must be held accountable. Evidence plays a key role in ensuring that those who should be held accountable for their actions are safe.

3. Type of evidence

Evidence gathered in criminal cases can be divided into two main categories in terms of the method we use to explain the facts and the purpose for which the evidence is presented.

Evidence can be divided into three main categories: evidence, documentary evidence, and descriptive evidence in terms of the method we use to explain the facts or conclusions of the conclusion.

A. Testonial evidence

This type of evidence is a way for people to express their understanding of the existence or non-existence of an object or the act or action of an action or the accuracy of a conclusion by using their senses to present a case to a body investigating a crime or to a court of law. By their senses, they mean what they see with their eyes, hear with their ears, taste with their tongues, smell with their noses, touch with their skin, and feel.

If the witness is unable or unwilling to speak in person, as described above, he or she may sign the information he or she knows in the manner described above and the statement may be interpreted orally by the person who knows the sign language. For example, I saw Bill take his mobile phone out of his pocket, and I heard him threaten to kill a man named B, or he smelled a dead animal two days earlier in the room where the body was found. This may be due to the fact that the person is directly involved. On the other hand, he may not have heard or seen the subject himself, but he may have heard about it from someone else or related to the subject before and after the act. For example, I heard him say that he was stabbed when he died before his soul was released from his body. A few minutes earlier, a man in a bloody shirt was running past me.

B. Document evidence

As we can see from the wording of the document, any  Types of text, markings, drawings are generally any written or audio and / or photographic documentation. Copies, forged certificates, and the like are documents of evidence.

The crime was committed by presenting the documents (for example, a false driver’s license), whether he was in camera view at the time of the incident, to identify the extent and type of damage (for example, disability) after the incident, and the cause of the injury (eg fire). ) A written statement that can be explained by forensic examination is all documentary evidence.

C. Demonstrative evidence

These pieces of evidence are the evidence that the plaintiff and the defendant must consider in court during the hearing. The equipment used by the defendant to commit the crime, the property of the perpetrator or third party, falls under this type of evidence.

Thus, when the evidence is presented in court, it will help the court to verify the facts of the case or the conclusion of the case. For example, whether the evidence is true or not, or whether the object taken by the defendant may be transported. It plays an important role in identifying the issue.

The other piece of evidence can be divided into two categories: circumstancial evidense. We have seen the basic difference between direct evidence and indirect evidence under the evidence above, but we can also divide the documentary evidence into indirect or indirect evidence. For example, if a document about a duty between people is presented as evidence, we can call this evidence a direct document.

However, this document may not be direct if any other document is presented that actually deals with this document. For example, if there is a statement that the buyer or recipient made the first payment of 1000 birr in accordance with the obligations entered into by the parties and the check was not sufficient account at the time of payment. It is a direct document, and the contract is an indirect proof of the substance of the check.

4. Evidence Requirements (Evidence Principles)

Evidence must meet three main points in order for it to be valid before the law. These points:

A. Relevance

Any evidence presented to prove a point must be directly or indirectly related to the subject matter or the subject matter to which it is intended to be presented.

B. Reliable

Anyone who is charged with a crime can be prosecuted only if there is sufficient evidence. These evidence must be credible in addition to their ability to present sufficient evidence. Evidence cannot be substantiated by any sane person. Witnesses who have witnessed the case provide credible evidence. For example, in the case of a 12-year-old boy who testified that he stole a motorcycle, the credentials of this witness should be examined. We can see that he is the one who can do this by returning the motorcycle to the scene and driving it. This is a matter of investigation. Sometimes people who are not asked about their age or health may claim that they have committed a crime they did not commit in order to protect others from legal action.

C. Legally obtained admissablity 

Our Code of Conduct clearly sets out how the evidence should be collected. Therefore, the collection of evidence is outside the scope of the investigation, as required by law. For example, under Article 19 (2) of the Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure clearly states under Article 27 (2) of the Penal Code. Evidence collected in this way will not be considered legal because it has been obtained in violation of the provisions of the law, has been misrepresented, intimidated and coerced by witnesses, raided people’s homes and property, and so on.

Therefore, in order for an evidence to be accepted before the law, any evidence must play a role in the administration of criminal justice.

4. Collection of evidence

We have looked at the nature, importance and type of evidence above. Under this article, we will look at how these pieces of evidence should be collected. Basically, the evidence is collected by the investigating police officer who conducts investigations in accordance with the procedural rules of the Penal Code. He may conduct an investigation. When the victim makes a personal complaint in accordance with Article 212 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, any person or himself or any other police officer has a reasonable suspicion of committing a crime based on the allegations or allegations made by the plaintiff. On the other hand, since the police are currently investigating the crime in conjunction with the law, they should be referred to the relevant body or dismissed, rather than deciding whether to initiate an investigation if the case is not a criminal case and if it is a civil or administrative decision. However, they decide to investigate whether the case is a criminal offense under both our criminal law and various proclamations.

Once the investigator has received a complaint or charge, the next step is to gather evidence, documentation, and evidence to prove that the case or substance is true or that the conclusion of the case is true. It is important to know that it should be conducted, because the investigation can be distorted and misrepresent the basic facts that should not be lost.

A. Collecting Evidence

It is one of the most widely used pieces of evidence that the police can use to explain the facts of a criminal investigation. Therefore, the police, in conjunction with the prosecutor, in accordance with Article 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code, including the alleged perpetrator and the perpetrator or the perpetrator after the crime. Wherever he goes, Hollow may call on people he trusts to know directly or indirectly about the incident, or experts who should give a professional witness. The people who are called are also obliged to appear in person and tell the truth In the process, bribery, extortion, intimidation, and the use of force are prohibited. Evidence obtained in this way is also unacceptable. Also, if the witness answers the question, the police themselves. Article 30 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that he may be held liable and that he has the right not to answer the question. Therefore, the investigating police officer must respect this right. However, if this right is clearly prohibited by law, he is obliged to respond if he refuses to report the crime. For example, we can look at Proclamation No. 909/2007 on Trafficking in Persons and Refugees.

 Let us look at the methods used by the British in the investigation of serious and serious crimes.

PEACE model

P-Preparation and planning

E-Engagement and explain


C-Closure (Closure)


Preparation and Planning: The police, in conjunction with the law, should plan the investigation into the moderation, timing and sequence of the investigation and begin with the necessary methods, equipment, expertise and location for the investigation. Based on what we get from whom, what we ask for, at what stage the suspect should be arrested, if the investigation requires a public investigation, what action should we take to ensure that the sources of evidence are not harmed by wind, water or human beings and do not exist? They need to be prepared for the risk of being apprehended. This planned and prepared investigation saves time, money, and government costs by repeatedly calling witnesses.

Presentation and presentation: Witnesses come up with a number of issues in mind. Some of these issues are the misconception that I will benefit from testifying against the defendant, the fear that he will retaliate if I testify today, that I may call my testimony repeatedly and interrupt my personal life, and so on. The witness must be cleansed of these thoughts and concerns. In order to do this, the police must do everything possible to explain and reassure them that these threats do not occur and, in fact, to avoid problems. For example, in terms of risk, it is safe to say that the government has a law to protect witnesses and witnesses. it is.

The other point is that it is better to approach the witnesses in a simplified manner and talk about the general social issues for a few minutes before entering the case and tactfully get into the main issue. If this is the case, how about the witness’s personal life and his or her relationship with the suspect and victim? It helps to make sure that he knows what he is doing, but it also allows him to explain everything he knows without fear or panic. He then needs to explain the content of the case and explain what is required of him. The expression must be carefully considered, as it may hinder the investigation.

The biggest and most important precaution in the collection of evidence is that the testimony is based on truth and is not intended to harm or benefit anyone, because the witness has been bribed, to protect himself, his relatives, his friends, his family … in the past. False testimony may be given to the defendant in the event of a dispute or retaliation. In this regard, the police are obliged to verify that the witness’s statement is free of any of the above problems. The police should examine the witness before accepting the statement. Article 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for the investigation of witnesses by the police. If we look at the English version, it is entitled Examination of Witness by the police. Therefore, the witness should examine the facts of the witness’s statement instead of just writing what he says.

5. Obligation of the witness

The evidence that a person gives to an investigating police officer must be true and far-fetched from what he or she has seen, heard, tasted, smelled, and explored, because the false testimony of a person who has not committed a crime that should have been acquitted has a negative impact. The law provides for criminal prosecution for defamation.

Questioning: The police should not question the witness leader in the first place. The questions that need to be answered are the questions that need to be answered. There are some unanswered questions that need to be answered, and it is best to finally clarify them with the leading questions.

The remaining two parts are summarizing and measuring or measuring.

In this way, the evidence that the witness has been properly questioned must be attached to the record of the investigation. In particular, the question to be asked of the witness must be in a way that proves the substance of the crime. When, how, who, what, what, why, what … he knows. We should not wait for him to tell us what we want him to say

B. Collection of documentary evidence

Documents can be obtained from governmental and non-governmental organizations, private businesses, public enterprises, medical institutions, the Federal Police Forensic Investigation Department, the Quality and Standards Authority, educational institutions, banking and insurance institutions, and so on. Information must be carefully collected and maintained. One of the precautions is that the document collected must be directly or indirectly related to the subject matter of the investigation or the subject matter to be verified, in accordance with the rules of procedure and in respect of human rights (Article 26 of the Constitution). He must also prove their legitimacy.

These documents indicate a person’s identity, qualifications and license, disability or cause of death, the cause of the fire, the amount of money in the bank account, the quality of the product, the audit report showing the financial deficiency, employment and dismissal, and so on. These documents are presented so that the court can look at them and understand them. If another hidden camera that can record and record human activity is used, this video will make the investigation effective.

Some criminal cases are based on documentary evidence. It is important that these documents are presented and brought to the attention of the judiciary to investigate and prosecute these crimes. On the other hand, a person who knows or assumes that his or her actions are criminal charges may destroy the evidence and prevent the police from accessing them. Special attention should be paid to the location of the evidence as soon as possible.

The other piece of evidence is evidence of the defendant’s confession at the station.

It is sufficient to refer to Section 27 (2). Under this provision, the defendant is not obliged to testify, but stipulates that the statement shall be made as a voluntary statement without any pressure or influence. In this regard, the police shall, in any way respect the constitutional rights of individuals. Defendant’s statement obtained in this way will not be accepted. Instead, the police must explain to the defendant in a language that the respondent has the right not to respond to the request. The FDRE Constitution also provides for the defendant’s rights and obligations under Article 19 (2) of the FDRE Constitution. It clearly states the combination.

C. Collection of descriptive evidence

We have looked at the nature of the evidence above. These evidence are the location of the crime, the hands of the perpetrator, the place where the proceeds of the crime are stored or hidden, and so on, the property the suspect used or committed as a result of the crime. The police can seize this evidence in a variety of ways. The first is based on a search warrant issued by a court of law, when the police suspect that a person has committed a crime and has hidden or stored evidence in the house. He may search the premises where he is suspected of hiding or storing evidence, such as fences, farms, vehicles, ships, airplanes, and so on.

The search warrant must state the nature of the search and seizure evidence. Therefore, the police may not search or seize anything other than what is on the search warrant. Instead, the list of items or items seized in accordance with the order must be observed by independent persons. Unless ordered, the time limit set by the police to conduct the search must be 12 noon to 12:00, as required by the Code of Conduct.

Therefore, anyone who reports that the police have come to search the house and seizes the evidence in the house may ask for a court order to do so, and if he does not do so, he may be told that he cannot enter the house unless he is able to do so. This is especially true without a court order. There is no legal basis for holding evidence.

The other is to search and out evidence without a court order. As mentioned above, a search warrant must be obtained from a court to gather evidence. However, in some cases, the police may search any house and seize evidence without having to do so. This is if the first offender was caught red-handed or committed the crime under house surveillance or deposited evidence in the house, and the other was charged under Article 32 (2) (b) of the Penal Code with more than three years’ imprisonment. However, if the police suspect that the item may be removed or confiscated until the issuance of a search warrant, the search warrant may be searched and seized without the need for a court order. Everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

These assets will remain in the hands of the government until the court makes a final decision on the matter and may eventually be returned to the rightful investor or owner, remitted to the government or not reused or disposed of. Evidence should be kept according to their nature. But first, these materials must be numbered, categorized in type, quantity, and content, and held accountable.

If the evidence is perishable, such as fruits and grains, they should be sold immediately by photography or videotape, and the proceeds from the sale should be kept in a bank until the matter is finally decided (Exhibit Management and Preservation Manual).

6. The house is searched and everyone is obligated

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.  It is also the responsibility of the police to inform the suspect that he or she is preparing to receive the evidence. On the other hand, the police are required to authorize and cooperate during the investigation. The law stipulates that the police may use force as long as they are able to conduct the search if there is opposition to any attempt to obstruct the search.

7. Crime scene investigation

One of the ways in which a police officer collects evidence during a criminal investigation is through a crime scene investigation. This investigation involves the police in person at the scene of the crime. The crime scene may include the land, water body, ship, car, forest area, and so on.

The investigation is usually carried out at the moment the crime is committed. The first task of the criminal investigation team is to identify, rescue and care for the victims, and to arrest the suspect while he or she is away. Then identify those who were present and those who need evidence. Take notes and, if possible, testify. Once this is done, the next step is to prevent people from entering the area by enclosing as much land as possible to collect evidence and to keep track of the identities of previous occupants. This is due to the fact that some pieces of evidence may be damaged by human contact. (For example, forensic examination samples, such as fingerprints) and because the people in the area are in contact with the crime scene, their fingerprints may be found in the reference work.

In particular, criminal investigations, such as human trafficking and cross-border trafficking, are likely to be lost, and forensic investigators will be able to collect evidence, travel with the CID, and identify the samples used as evidence for investigation. It should be pointed out and collected. This evidence cannot be recovered after it has been made available to the public, so the expert must be sure that the evidence or samples were taken with certainty and without exception.

as if Forensic tests are samples used to obtain evidence of blood, urine, semen, hair, etc. from a crime scene.

8. What is expected of the community? 

Anyone in the area of ​​the crime must report the crime to the police officer, who must not try to enter the crime scene or house until the police arrive and complete the necessary evidence gathering, and prevent others from entering the crime scene, for example, business. A person whose property has been broken into or whose property has been stolen should not enter the store, touch the door handle and body parts, as well as items in the room, as this will reduce the chances of the police getting the evidence they need. When the victim sees another person, when he sees or suspects any crime, the investigating officer must inform the police and protect the area from himself or others.

The police, using professional investigation techniques, can take the necessary precautionary evidence to the court, collect the evidence of the alleged source of the crime, make sure that nothing is left out, hand it over carefully, transport the sample or fingerprints to the place of examination, and confirm the results in writing. It should be included in the preamble. It should be listed in the preamble. In particular, crimes that require forensic investigation, such as arson, murder, drug use and / or conspiracy, human trafficking, etc., should be investigated in this way.

Accordingly, if a person is killed during a crime scene investigation, the body must be sent to the hospital and the results should be monitored. In this regard, medical professionals should independently examine the extent of the injuries, from ordinary injuries to death, and send the findings to the examination room in a confidential manner.

9. Evidence presentation

As noted above, the police, in conjunction with the prosecutor, will evaluate the evidence after completing the evidence collection and investigation. If the evidence is not sufficient to prosecute the defendant, the evidence indicates that sufficient evidence has not been provided. 1) A closes the case on the basis of A, but when he believes that the evidence can prove the substance of the case, he will file a lawsuit citing the provisions of the law. He will then refer the case to the competent court.

During the hearing, the defendant presented the details of the evidence attached to the case, stating that the case had been read to him and that the court had ruled in his favor after the first instance objection and the defendant’s response, and that he had denied the allegations in whole or in part. It is important to note that in the case of a single charge against a defendant, it is not possible to have a witness on the grounds that the defendant has admitted part of the charge and that the other party has not been able to prove his guilt. Article 134 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for this.

In this case, if the defendant denies the charge, the burden of proof rests with the prosecutor, because he has a duty to explain the facts of the case and to prove the correctness of the conclusion. The burden of proof can be transferred to the defendant if he is able to prove the charge according to the original evidence. Given the unique nature of crimes such as corruption (unknown income) and human trafficking and smuggling, the burden of proof goes to the defendant. For example, a government with a low monthly salary. The law requires that the defendant be paid a significant amount of money, depending on the amount of wages he or she receives each month and the amount of assets he or she acquires. The law does not require the defendant to adequately explain his or her obligations to other offenders. He is obliged to explain where he got the property or how he was able to produce it. The law does not adequately explain that I am illegally acquiring the property and if he requests that I be acquitted, it will not be accepted.

Returning to the formal criminal evidence system, the prosecutor presented the evidence, documents and descriptive evidence to the court for review of the facts of the case. Therefore, he or she may present the evidence gathered during the investigation in an orderly or coherent manner. If the evidence cannot be presented in court due to its unique nature, it must be presented with a photograph, as well as a small sample of the evidence presented to the court.

After these arguments were presented, the left and right argued that if the evidence adequately clarified the facts of the case, the court ordered the defendant to present his defense and refute the charges. The defendant used the legal procedure used by the prosecution to present his evidence.


  • Evidence is information that is intended to convince the judicial body of a decision on the merits or demerits of a case.

  • On the other hand, in light of the above detail, the difference between information and evidence must be clearly identified
     Gathering sufficient and convincing evidence before a court of law is an appropriate and important matter
     Evidence that can explain the facts directly or indirectly related to the act;
  •  Evidence can be divided into two main categories in terms of the method we use to explain the facts and the purpose for which the evidence is presented. Evidence should be available.
  • In terms of the method we use to explain the facts, we can divide the evidence into human testimony, documentation, and narrative.

  •  Evidence may be divided into direct or indirect evidence.
     Testimony is the oral testimony of people who use their senses to present their case to a body that investigates a crime or to a court of law.

  •  Witnesses are required to provide accurate and unambiguous information about what they have heard, tasted, smelled, and explored.

  •  Document Evidence Any type of text, mark, or paper with any type of evidence or sound and / or image is generally recorded.

  •  Documentary documents indicate the nature of the injury or death, the cause of the fire, the amount of money in the bank account, the quality of the product, the audit report showing the deficit, various official letters about decisions about employment and dismissal, etc.

  •  These evidence during the hearing Plaintiff and Defendant Propagate the Court to Consider
     The instrument used by the defendant to commit the crime shall be subject to this type of evidence.

  •  The police must gather evidence, documents, and evidence to prove that a case or substance is true or that the conclusion is true.

  •  A crime scene investigation is a way for the police to gather evidence in person at the scene of a crime. The crime scene may include the land, water body, ship, car, forest area, and so on.

  •  In light of the burden of proof, the prosecutor is obliged to explain the facts of the case if the defendant has denied the allegations.

  •  However, depending on the nature of the crime, the burden of proof may be borne by the defendant when it is clearly determined by law.

1954 It is a comparison of our legal provisions with the Criminal Procedure Code and the proposed Code of Criminal Procedure.

1954 It is a comparison of our legal provisions with the Criminal Procedure Code and the proposed Code of Criminal Procedure.

Under our current Criminal Procedure Code Rule 63, a person loses his right to bail if he has been charged with a crime punishable by more than 15 years and the injured person is expected to die or die. Although there is no consensus among legal experts on the interpretation of the article, the interpretation that many legal scholars agree on and that is in line with human rights provisions is that the law deprives a person of the right to bail only when two conditions are met.
If one person is killed or injured, the person is expected to die tomorrow, and the other is sentenced to more than 15 years in prison if the person is charged or suspected of a crime. In addition, other proclamations stipulate that a person suspected of terrorism or corruption for more than a decade is not entitled to bail.
Under Section 154 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, however, a person suspected of a crime punishable by life imprisonment or death (whether or not the person died as a result of the crime) is denied bail. Also, a person suspected of corruption under Article 154 (2) shall not be released on bail if the type of offense is punishable by more than ten years or if he is convicted of multiple corruption offenses and the sentence may be more than ten years. In addition, under Article 154 (1) of the same law, crimes against the Constitution and the constitutional order, crimes against the State Security and Defense Forces, terrorism, human trafficking, and rape of women and children are denied bail. ፡ Searching
Now, in the 1954 draft. The big difference between the law is that under current law, a person does not lose his or her right to bail unless he or she has committed suicide or the victim has died and the alleged crime (homicide) is punishable by more than 15 years. In other words, under current law, a defendant could not be sentenced to life imprisonment and up to 15 years in prison unless convicted of murder. This means that if the courts think that the person will be acquitted or found guilty of murder, they will be granted bail, even if the crime is not related to murder. In contrast, under the current Criminal Procedure Code, if a person is charged with a crime punishable by life imprisonment or death, the right to bail is prohibited. On the one hand, under current law, defendants who have been charged with aggravated manslaughter and are not liable to life imprisonment or death penalty for a crime punishable by up to 20 years will be released on bail when the draft law is enacted. On the other hand, under the current law, people who have been released on bail for crimes related to human life but not for life or death will be denied bail when the bill is passed by parliament.
According to the author, the draft law has two unfair consequences.
First of all, why should a person be denied bail because he is suspected or charged with a crime punishable by life imprisonment or death?
50 years ago, our law concluded that even if a person is charged with a crime punishable by life imprisonment, his right to bail should not be denied except by the decision of a judge and a conscientious objection, how can the rights of these people be promoted when the world is civilized and our country recognizes international human rights? Are we going backwards? The reason for the release of a suspect on bail is Article 20 (3) of our Constitution, which states that a person has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty and convicted in a court of law, in accordance with international human rights law and conventions. That is to say. In particular, the accused has the constitutional and human right to be released on bail so that he or she can be returned to his or her home and not be harmed. He should also have the right to stand on his own two feet to defend himself so that he does not become a victim. The right to bail should not be denied as much as possible, since even if the person has done something wrong, the only way to present his case and give a fair trial is if the person has collected the evidence on bail. There is no compelling and valid reason for the legislature to relinquish the power to release suspects on bail in cases of life and death. Constitutional human rights should not be restricted unless there is a good reason and no alternative. In fact, when restricted, the restrictions should be as small and reasonable as possible. Instead, instead of denying the accused the right to bail in Article 156, the bill introduces new and innovative ideas to prevent the defendant from posting bail, moving away from a place or participating in certain places in accordance with the provisions of Articles 134 to 156 of the Criminal Code. While judges can use these practices, instead of leaving the jurisdiction to the courts to determine the rights of people convicted of crimes punishable by life imprisonment, it is unfair to deny the rights of the Proclamation and not to use other alternatives. Recognizing that the defendant is likely to be acquitted, the judges in each case will be able to decide (revoke the bail), but the revocation of the judges’ power and the general revocation of the bail will not be appropriate unless it is absolutely necessary and optional. Our courts have many problems, but we need to trust them. In this regard, both the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation and the Anti-Corruption Proclamation need to be re-examined. Crimes against the constitutional order, defense, and security were also reported in 1954. According to the current and current law, unless the loss of life is a criminal offense, but in the draft law, the loss of life of the suspects is not a matter of enrichment of the law, but a matter of justice.
According to the author, this is not the end of the draft law. According to the draft law, those charged with aggravated homicide (excluding extrajudicial killings) will be released on bail even if the victim dies. In 1954, which is currently under construction. Under the Penal Code, however, a person charged with murder is not released on bail. It is extremely difficult in our country to be released on bail, even if the suspect is innocent, even if the suspect is innocent, even if he or she is innocent enough to kill us because of negligence or incapacity, or because of a deliberate murder and bloodshed. If the killer disappears after being released on bail, the moral damage to the family and the community will be severely curtailed. In addition to the traditional law and practice of bloodshed and self-inflicted revenge in many areas, the fact that he himself is a suspect and has disappeared will lead his innocent family to revenge and endless bloodshed. Therefore, according to the author, allowing people who are suspected of killing a person with serious negligence (punishable by up to 15 years in prison) or murder (as a result of a bloodbath) may be more dangerous and harmful to society.
Restricting the right to bail of people suspected of murder and aggravated murder by law is proportional and constitutional, as it protects the suspects themselves from retaliation and protects the community from bloodshed.
In conclusion, our draft Criminal Procedure Code, 1954, is currently in force. People who have been charged with aggravated or aggravated murder or genocide and other similar war crimes should be deprived of their bail only if the victim is expected to die or die. Apart from this, the guarantee should not be revoked only for crimes that have resulted in loss of life or death and are punishable by more than 16 years, but should not be enacted by a proclamation that guarantees the right to bail for those charged with backwardness and life imprisonment, but not for murder. .

በ1954 ዓ.ም. በወጣው የወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ሕግ ሥነ ሥርዓት ሕጋችንና በመረቀቅ ላይ ባለው የወንጀል ሥነ ሥርዓት ሕግ መካከል ዋስትና በሕግ የሚከለከልበትን ሁኔታ ማነፃፀርና የመፍትሔ አስተያየት መሰንዘር ነው፡፡

አሁን ሥራ ላይ ባለው የወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ሕግ ሥነ ሥርዓት ሕጋችን ቁጥር 63 መሠረት አንድ ሰው በዋስትና የመለቀቅ መብቱን የሚያጣው ከ15 ዓመት በላይ በሚያስቀጣ ወንጀል የተከሰሰ እንደሆነና በወንጀሉ ጉዳት የደረሰበት ሰው የሞተ ወይም ይሞታል ተብሎ የሚጠበቅ እንደሆነ ነው፡፡ ምንም እንኳን በሕግ ባለሙያዎች መካከል ስለአንቀጹ አተረጓጎም ስምምነት ባይኖርም በርካታ የሕግ ምሁራን የሚቀበሉትና ከሰብዓዊ መብት ድንጋጌዎች ጋር የሚጣጣመው አተረጓጎም አንድ ሰው በዋስ የመለቀቅ መብቱን ሕግ የሚነፍገው ሁለት ነገር ሲሟላ ብቻ ነው፡፡
አንደኛው ሰው ከገደለ ወይም ጉዳት ያደረሰበት ሰው ከዛሬ ነገ ይሞታል ተብሎ የሚጠበቅ ሲሆን ሁለተኛው ደግሞ ሰውዬው የተከሰሰበት ወይም የተጠረጠረበት የወንጀል ዓይነት ከ15 ዓመት በላይ የሚያስቀጣ ከሆነ ነው፡፡ ከዚህ ውጪ በሽብርተኝነት ወይም ከአሥር ዓመት በላይ በሚያስቀጣ ሙስና ወንጀል የተጠረጠረ ሰው የዋስ መብቱ እንደማይጠበቅለት በሌሎች አዋጆች ተደንግጓል፡፡
እየተረቀቀ ባለው የወንጀል ሥነ ሥርዓት ሕግ ቁጥር 154 (3) መሠረት ግን በዕድሜ ልክ ወይም በሞት በሚያስቀጣ ወንጀል የተጠረጠረ ሰው (በወንጀሉ የተነሳ ሰው ሞተም አልሞተም) በዋስትና የመለቀቅ መብቱን በሕግ ተከልክሏል፡፡ እንዲሁም በዚሁ ድንጋጌ ቁጥር 154 (2) መሠረት በሙስና ወንጀል የተጠረጠረ ሰው የወንጀሉ ዓይነት ከአሥር ዓመት በላይ የሚያስቀጣ ከሆነ ወይም በተደራራቢ የሙስና ወንጀሎች ተከሶ ቅጣቱ ተደማምሮ ከአሥር ዓመት በላይ ሊበልጥ የሚችል ከሆነ በዋስትና መለቀቅ አይችልም፡፡ በተጨማሪም በዚሁ በረቂቁ ሕግ ቁጥር 154 (1) መሠረት በሕገ መንግሥቱና በሕገ መንግሥታዊው ሥርዓት ላይ የሚፈጸሙ ወንጀሎች፣ በመንግሥት የውጭ ደኅንነትና መከላከያ ኃይል ላይ የሚፈጸሙ ወንጀሎች፣ የሽብርተኝነት ወንጀል፣ የሕገወጥ የሰው ዝውውር ወንጀል፣ በሴቶችና በሕፃናት ላይ በሚፈጸም አስገድዶ የመድፈር ወንጀል የተጠረጠረ ሰው በዋስትና የመለቀቅ መብቱን ተነፍጓል፡፡
እንግዲህ በረቂቁና ሥራ ላይ ባለው የ1954 ዓ.ም. ሕግ መካከል ትልቁ ልዩነት አሁን ሥራ ላይ ባለው ሕግ መሠረት አንድ ሰው (የፀረ ሙስናና የፀረ ሽብር አዋጆች እንደተጠበቁ ሆኖ) ነፍስ ካላጠፋ ወይም ተጎጂው የሚሞት ካልሆነና የተጠረጠረበትም ወንጀል (የነፍስ ግድያ ዓይነት) ከ15 ዓመት በላይ የሚያስቀጣ ካልሆነ በስተቀር በሕግ በዋስትና የመለቀቅ መብቱን አያጣም፡፡ በሌላ አባባል አሁን በሚሠራበት ሕግ መሠረት አንድ ተከሳሽ የሰው ነፍስ ካላጠፋ በስተቀር የተጠረጠረበት ወንጀል 15 ዓመት ቀርቶ በዕድሜ ልክና በሞት ሊያስቀጣ ቢችልም እንኳን በዋስትና የመለቀቅ መብቱ በአዋጅ አልተገፈፈም፡፡ ይህ ማለት ግን ፍርድ ቤቶች ሰውየው ቢለቀቅ የሚጠፋ ከመሰላቸው ወይም ማስረጃ የሚያጠፋ ሆኖ ካገኙት ወንጀሉ ከነፍስ ግድያ ጋር ባይያያዝም ዋስትና የመንፈግ ሥልጣን የተሰጣቸው መሆኑ እንደተጠበቀ ሆኖ ነው፡፡ በአንፃሩ ግን እየተረቀቀ ባለው የወንጀል ሥነ ሥርዓት ሕግ መሠረት ግን ቁም ነገሩ የሰው ነፍስ መጥፋት አለመጥፋት መሆኑ ቀርቶ አንድ ሰው በዕድሜ ልክ ወይም በሞት በሚያስቀጣ ወንጀል ከተከሰሰ በዋስ የመለቀቅ መብቱ በሕግ ሊከለከል ነው፡፡ በአንድ በኩል አሁን ባለው ሕግ መሠረት በዋስ ሊለቀቁ የማይችሉ በዕድሜ ልክና በሞት ሳይሆን በ20 ዓመት ብቻ በሚያስቀጣ የተራ ነፍስ ግድያ ወንጀል የተከሰሱና ጉዳት ያደረሱበት ሰው የሞተ (ይሞታል ተብሎ የሚጠበቅ) ተከሳሾች ረቂቁ ሕግ አዋጅ ሆኖ በሚወጣበት ጊዜ በዋስ ሊለቀቁ ነው፡፡ በሌላ በኩል አሁን ባለው ሕግ መሠረት በዋስ ሊለቀቁ የሚችሉ ከሰው ሕይወት ጋር በማይያያዝ ነገር ግን እስከ ዕድሜ ልክ ወይም ሞት በሚደርስ በሚያስቀጡ ወንጀሎች የተከሰሱ ሰዎች ረቂቁ ሕግ በፓርላማ በሚፀድቅበት ጊዜ የዋስ መብታቸው ሊነፈግ ነው፡፡
እንደ ጽሑፍ አቅራቢው እምነት ከሆነ ረቂቅ ሕጉ ኢፍትሐዊ የሆኑ ሁለት ውጤቶችን ያስከትላል፡፡
በመጀመርያ አንድ ሰው እስከ ዕድሜ ልክ ወይም ሞት ድረስ በሚያስቀጣ ወንጀል ስለተጠረጠረ ወይም ስለተከሰሰ ብቻ ለምን በዋስ ወጥቶ የመከራከር መብቱን ይነፈጋል?
ከዛሬ 50 ዓመት በፊት የወጣው ሕጋችን አንድ ሰው እስከ ዕድሜ ልክና ሞትም ድረስ በሚያስቀጣ ወንጀል ቢከሰስም እንኳን በዳኞች ውሳኔና የህሊና ፍርድ ካልሆነ በስተቀር በዋስትና የመለቀቅ መብቱን በአዋጅ ሊነፈግ አይገባም የሚል አቋም ይዞ ሲያበቃ፣ አሁን ዓለም በሠለጠነችበትና አገራችንም ዓለም አቀፍ ሰብዓዊ መብቶችን ባፀደቀችበት ወቅት እንዴት የእነኝህን ሰዎች መብት በአዋጅ በመግፈፍ ወደ ኋላ እንጓዛለን? በወንጀል የተጠረጠረ ሰው በዋስ እንዲለቀቅ የሚፈቀድለት ምክንያት በሕገ መንግሥታችን አንቀጽ 20 (3) ላይ አንድ ሰው በወንጀል ተከሶ፣ ጥፋተኝነቱ በማስረጃ ተረጋግጦ በፍርድ ቤት ጥፋተኛ ነው ተብሎ ካልተወሰነበት በስተቀር ንጹሕ ሆኖ የመገመት (እንደጥፋተኛ ያለመቆጠር) መብት አለው የሚለውንና በዓለም አቀፍ ሰብዓዊ መብት ድንጋጌዎችና ስምምነቶች ተቀባይነት ያለውን መርህ ለመተግባር ሲባል ነው፡፡ በተለይም የተከሰሰው ሰው በእስር ሆኖ ጉዳዩ ሲታይ ቆይቶ በኋላ ንፁህ መሆኑ የተረጋገጠ እንደሆነ ሊመለስና ሊተካ የማይችል ጉዳት እንዳይደርስበት ሲባል በዋስ የመለቀቅ ሕገ መንግሥታዊና ሰብዓዊ መብት አለው፡፡ እንዲሁም በሥሩ የሚረዳቸው ወይም የሚያግዛቸው ሰዎች ካሉ ከራሱ አልፎ እነሱም ተጎጂ እንዳይሆኑ ሲባል በዋስ ወጥቶ የመከራከር መብቱ ሊከበርለት ይገባል፡፡ ሌላው ቀርቶ ሰውዬው በተወሰነ ደረጃ በትክክል ያጠፋም እንኳን ቢሆን በእሱ በኩል ያለውን ማስረጃ በትክክል ለማቅረብና በእውነት ላይ የተመረኮዘ ፍርድ ለመስጠት የሚቻለው ሰውዬው በዋስ ሆኖ እንደልቡ ማስረጃዎቹን አሰባስቦ የተከራከረ እንደሆነ ብቻ ስለሆነ የዋስትና መብት በተቻለ መጠን ፈጽሞ በአዋጅ ሊከለከል አይገባም፡፡ ሕግ አውጪው እስከ ዕድሜ ልክና በሞት ሊያስቀጣ በሚችል ጉዳይ የተጠረጠሩ ሰዎችን በዋስ የመልቀቅና ያመልቀቅ ሥልጣንን ከዳኞች ላይ ቀምቶ የሁሉንም ተጠርጣሪዎች መብት በአዋጅ የሚገፍበትና በፊት የነበረውን ሕግ የሚያጠብቅበት አጥጋቢና ተቀባይነት ያለው ምክንያት የለውም፡፡ ሕገ መንግሥታዊ ሰብዓዊ መብቶች አጥጋቢና በቂ ምክንያት ከሌለና አማራጭ ካልታጣ በስተቀር ሊገደቡ አይገባም፡፡ ያውም ሲገደቡ በተቻለ መጠን የመብት ክልከላው አነስተኛና ተመጣጣኝ መሆን አለበት፡፡ ይልቁንም ረቂቅ ሕጉ በቁጥር 156 ላይ በወንጀል የተከሰሰን ሰው ዋስትና መብት ከመንፈግ ይልቅ ተከሳሹ ከወንጀል ሕግ ቁጥር 134 እስከ 156 በተደነገገው መሠረት ተመሳሳይ የወንጀል ድርጊት ላለመፈጸም የእጅ ጠብቅ ዋስ እንዲያቀርብ፣ ከአንድ ቦታ ርቆ እንዳይሄድ ወይም ወደ አንዳንድ ቦታዎች ድርሽ እንዳይል መከልከል የሚቻልበትን ለአገራችን አዲስና የመጠቁ ሐሳቦችን ይዞና አስተዋውቆ እያለና ዳኞች እነኝህን አሠራሮችን መጠቀም ሲችሉ፣ በደፈናው እስከ ዕድሜ ልክና ሞት ድረስ በሚያስቀጣ ወንጀል የተከሰሱ ሰዎችን የዋስትና መብት በዳኞች እንዲወሰን ሥልጣኑን ለፍርድ ቤቶች ከመተው ይልቅ መብቱን በአዋጁ መግፈፉ ተመጣጣኝ ካለመሆኑም በላይ ሌሎች አማራቾችን ለመጠቀም አለመሞከሩን የሚያሳይ ነው፡፡ ተከሳሹ ይጠፋል ተብሎ የሚገመትበት ሁኔታ ካለ በእያንዳንዱ ጉዳይ የሚቀመጡት ዳኞች አመዛዝነው መወሰን (ዋስትናውን መንፈግ) እንደሚችሉ እየታወቀ፣ የዳኞችን ሥልጣን ቀምቶ በሕግ በጅምላ ዋስትና የመንፈግ አሠራር በእርግጥም አስፈላጊ ካልሆነና አማራጭ ካልጠፋ በስተቀር አግባብነት አይኖረውም፡፡ ፍርድ ቤቶቻችን ብዙ ችግር ቢኖርባቸውም አመኔታ ልንጥልባቸው ይገባል፡፡ ከዚህ አኳያ የፀረ ሽብር አዋጁም ሆነ የፀረ ሙስና አዋጆች እንደገና ሊፈተሹ ይገባል፡፡ እንዲሁም በሕገ መንግሥታዊው ሥርዓት፣ በመንግሥት መከላከያና ደኅንነት ላይ የሚፈጸሙትም ወንጀሎች ቢሆኑ በ1954 ዓ.ም. በወጣውና አሁን ሥራ ላይ ባለው ሕግ መሠረት የሰው ሕይወት ካልጠፋ በስተቀር በሕግ ዋስትና የማያስከለክሉ ወንጀሎች ሆነው እያሉ፣ በረቂቅ ሕጉ ግን የሰው ሕይወት ጠፋም አልጠፋም የተጠርጣሪዎቹ የዋስትና መብት በጅምላ መገፈፉ ሕጉን የሚያበለጽገው ሳይሆን ፍትሐዊነቱን የኋሊት የሚያስኬደው ነው፡፡
በጽሑፍ አቅራቢው እምነት የረቂቁ ሕግ ችግር በዚህ ብቻ አያበቃም፡፡ በረቂቁ ሕግ መሠረት ከከባድ ግድያ (በቀድሞ ሕግ ከግፍ አገዳደል ውጪ) በተራ ነፍስ ማጥፋት ግድያ የተከሰሱ ሰዎች ተጎጂው ቢሞትም እንኳን በዋስ ሊለቀቁ ነው፡፡ አሁን እየተሠራበት ባለው በ1954 ዓ.ም. የወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ሕግ ሥነ ሥርዓት መሠረት ግን በተራ ነፍስ ግድያ የተከሰሰ ሰው በዋስትና አይለቀቅም፡፡ ክቡር የሆነ የሰው ልጅ ሕይወት በቸልተኝነት ወይም ከአቅም በላይ በሆነ ምክንያት፣ ወይም በደም ፍላት ሳይሆን ሆነ ተብሎ በተፈፀመ ግድያ በተቀጠፈበትና ደም በፈሰሰበት ሁኔታ ገድሏል ተብሎ በበቂ ሁኔታ የተጠረጠረን ሰው ምንም እንኳን ተጠርጣሪው ንፁህ ቢሆንም በዋስ መልቀቅ ከአገራችን ተጨባጭ ሁኔታ አንፃር እጅግ በጣም ይከብዳል፡፡ ገዳዩ በዋስ ከተለቀቀ በኋላ የተሰወረ እንደሆነ በሟች ቤተሰቦችና በኅብረተሰቡ ላይ የሚደርሰው የሞራል ጉዳት ከፍተኛ ነው፡፡ በዚያ ላይ በብዙ አካባቢዎች ከዳበረው የደም መቃባትና ፍትሕን በራስ እጅ አስገብቶ ከመበቀል ባህላዊ ሕግና አሠራር አንፃር፣ ራሱ በዋስ የተለቀቀውን ተጠርጣሪና የተሰወረም እንደሆነ ንፁሃን ቤተሰቦቹን ለብቀላና ማለቂያ ለሌለው የደም መቃባት የሚዳርጋቸው ነው፡፡ ስለዚህ እንደ ጽሑፍ አቅራቢው እምነት ምናልባት በከባድ ቸልተኝነት ሰው በመግደል (እስከ 15 ዓመት በሚያስቀጣው) ወይም በደም ፍላት (በአልሞት ባይ ተጋዳይነት) ሰው በመግደል የተጠረጠሩ ሰዎች በዋስ ሊለቀቁ ከሚችሉ በስተቀር በተራ ነፍስ ግድያ የተጠረጠሩ ሰዎችን በዋስ እንዲለቀቁ መፍቀድ የከፋ አደጋና ጉዳት በኅብረተሰቡ ላይ ያስከትላል፡፡
በተራ ነፍስ ግድያና በከባድ ነፍስ ግድያ በሚገባ የተጠረጠሩ ሰዎችን በዋስ የመለቀቅ መብቱን በሕግ መገደብ ራሳቸው ተጠርጣሪዎቹን ከበቀል የሚታደግና ኅብረተሰቡንም ከደም መቃባት የሚጠበቅ በመሆኑ ተመጣጣኝነት ያለውና ሕገ መንግሥታዊ ነው፡፡
ሲጠቃለል ረቂቅ የወንጀል ሥነ ሥርዓት ሕጋችን አሁን እየተሠራበት ያለውን የ1954 ዓ.ም. ወንጀለኛ መቅጫ ሕግ ሥነ ሥርዓት ፈለግ በመከተልና እሱንም ትንሽ በማሻሻል በተራ ወይም በከባድ የነፍስ ግድያ ወይም በዘር ማጥፋትና በሌሎች ተመሳሳይ የጦር ወንጀለኝነት ብቻ የተከሰሱ ሰዎችን ያውም ተጎጂው የሞተ ወይም ይሞታል ተብሎ የሚጠበቅ ከሆነ ብቻ የዋስትና መብታቸው በሕግ ሊነፈግ ይገባል፡፡ ከዚህ ውጪ የሰው ሕይወት በጠፋባቸው ወይም ተጎጂው ይሞታል ተብሎ በሚጠበቅባቸውና ከ16 ዓመት በላይ በሚያስቀጡ ወንጀሎች ብቻ ዋስትና በሕግ ሊነፈግ ይገባል እንጂ ሕጉ የኋሊት ተጉዞ እስከ ዕድሜ ልክና ሞት ሊያስቀጣ በሚችልና ነገር ግን ከነፍሱ ግድያ ጋር ግንኙነት በሌለው ወንጀል የተከሰሱ ሰዎችን የዋስትና መብት ሁሉ በጅምላ (በደምሰሳው) በአዋጅ ሊገፍ አይገባም፡፡   

Which Dictator Killed The Most People?

Which Dictator Killed The Most People?

They say that it takes compassion for humanity, love for country and a strong pursuit of justice and mercy, to become a strong and respected leader of the masses. However, every once in a while, there are politicians or generals who decide to do things their own way. These cold-blooded dictators do not care for the value of life as much as they do for achieving their selfish motives of domination, power and immortality. The following infographic shows worldwide dictators ordered by the number of killings: 1 drop, 1 million dead. (Click the picture for a larger version)
Apparently, Hitler and Stalin combined killed less people that Mao Zedong…

dictatorship form of government offers for many advantages, for these benefits to translate into real life, a dictator needs to be selfless, benevolent, well experienced, and intelligent

Even though a dictatorship form of government offers for many advantages, for these benefits to translate into real life, a dictator needs to be selfless, benevolent, well experienced, and intelligent

What are the personality traits of a dictator?

The most common characteristic of a dictatorship: Hopelessness in the people — no hope of a free election to change leaders, no hope of fairness in court, no hope of a life lived with the freedom to speak your mind or challenge a bad idea.

What makes a ruler a dictator?

A dictator is a government leader who rules with unquestioned and unlimited power. Today, the term ” dictator ” is associated with cruel and oppressive rulers who violate human rights and maintain their power by jailing and executing their opponents

What are the bad things about dictatorship?

List of the Cons of a Dictatorship It is never a long-term solution to governing. In any given period of history, dictatorships tend to happen on the African continent more often than anywhere else. Opposition is rarely permitted. Under most dictatorships, opposition to the ruler or ruling party is rarely permitted. … Laws can be changed at any time. ..

What are the signs of a dictatorship?

Dictatorship refers to the misuses of political power. In the dictatorship characterized by the following symptoms such as press of mass media, abuse of human rights, embezzlement of public funds, un equity and misuse of constitution.

Is a good dictatorship better than a corrupt democracy?

yes honest dictator is better than corrupt democracy but then both have their plus and minus points, dictators have proved to be extremely ruthless, cruel, oppressing, and corrupt.

What are facts about dictatorship?

Facts About Dictatorship. 1. Dictatorship is a form of government in which a person or a group holds absolute power, unrestricted by laws, constitution or opposition. The term ‘dictator’ originated in the time of the Roman Republic .


======== Rule of Law ==========

What is the principle of the rule of law, based on the knowledge and experience of many scholars? He presented a number of theoretical analyzes regarding its content and benefits. In our country, fathers and mothers express the concept of the rule of law in one way or another, based on the truth and experience of their hearts. “If she goes to court, my mule will go without justice!” The central message of this parable and parable is not just for a few people but for the whole community. And when a society that is well versed in this concept of the rule of law violates the law; When injustice is done, When rights are suppressed:
When lawlessness reigns;

Who spreads arbitrarily and arbitrarily; When the private chicken is snatched outside the law and justice, it shouts loudly; God of law! Says. The screaming chicken did not bother him. But the way she was taken. If in judgment, According to the law, even chickens and buffaloes are not allowed to eat. In public administration; Political Science; Scholars in the field of law and other fields of thought and understanding of the nature and content of the rule of law are so diverse that the concept is still undecided. As one scholar in the field reinforces this idea, ‘[T] he rule of law’, like ‘democracy’, has no single meaning: it is not a legal rule, but a moral principle, which means different things to different people according to their particular moral positions.a As a result, the basic ideas of the political and constitutional systems of different countries have changed over time, and their basic ideas have become inconsistent. In the UK, for example, one of the hallmarks of the rule of law is that disputes between the government and the individual are settled only by ordinary courts. That means there is no rule of law in France in the eyes of the English. Because in France, disputes between individuals and the government are adjudicated from beginning to end through an independent administrative court system parallel to the regular court. Another interpretation of the rule of law in the United Kingdom is that it is the result of decisions made by the formal courts on individual rights and freedoms. While this view is true in the United Kingdom, the rights and freedoms of citizens in countries such as the United States, including our own, are enshrined in the constitution. In addition, in a liberal democracy, the rule of law means more than just ruling and governing the rule of law (eg, fairness, respect for the rights of citizens, the rule of law by elected representatives, etc.) and independent and independent courts; Democratic Institutions: The existence of a free press, etc., is all part of the concept of the rule of law. In contrast, in liberal democracy, the concept of unbaptized governments (for example, in China) is limited to the rule and rule of law. The rule of law is the basis on which administrative law (especially in the UK) is based. According to this principle, decisions made by the executive, administrative offices and governing councils must be in accordance with the law. Legal authority in government is vested in the government when it is established that the actions, actions, decisions, and directives of any government body are subject to the rule of law. If the decision of a government official is beyond the scope of the jurisdiction, the decision will undoubtedly violate the rule of law. Ensuring that law is enforced means that administrative actions, decisions, actions, rules and regulations are within the limits of the law. This is the function of ordinary courts. To minimize this practice, the legislature’s restriction on the jurisdiction of the courts undermines the rule of law. In addition to the threat to the rule of law, the restriction restricts citizens’ access to justice. In particular, if this right is constitutionally recognized, the power of the courts is limited, and in turn, the constitutional rights of citizens. It should be noted that the principle of the rule of law is not only the basis of administrative law but also the limit. Verifying the legitimacy of a decision will result in savings on the content. The courts’ role in upholding the rule of law prevents them from reviewing the content of administrative decisions or interfering with policy matters.


How Judges and Justices Are Chosen

The Senate Judiciary Committee reviews the president’s nominees to the federal bench before they are confirmed on the Senate floor. The committee holds its meetings in rooms such as this one, Committee Room 226 in the Senate Dirksen Office Building.

Legendary Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said that a Supreme Court Justice should be a “combination of Justinian, Jesus Christ, and John Marshall.”
Why are venerable former justices sources of guidance in understanding necessary qualities for federal judges?
The Constitution is silent on judicial qualifications. It meticulously outlines qualifications for the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the presidency, but it does not give any advice for judicial appointments other than stating that justices should exhibit “good behavior.” As a result, selections are governed primarily by tradition.

The Nomination Process

The Constitution provides broad parameters for the judicial nomination process. It gives the responsibility for nominating federal judges and justices to the president. It also requires nominations to be confirmed by the Senate. First, look at the numbers.
More than 600 judges sit on district courts, almost 200 judges sit on courts of appeals, and 9 justices make up the Supreme Court. Because all federal judges have life terms, no single president will make all of these appointments.
But many vacancies do occur during a president’s term of office. Appointing judges, then, could be a full-time job. A president relies on many sources to recommend appropriate nominees for judicial posts.
Recommendations often come from the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, members of Congress, sitting judges and justices, and the American Bar Association. Some judicial hopefuls even nominate themselves.
A special, very powerful tradition for recommending district judges is called senatorial courtesy. According to this practice, the senators from the state in which the vacancy occurs actually make the decision. A senator of the same political party as the President sends a nomination to the president, who almost always follows the recommendation. To ignore it would be a great affront to the senator, as well as an invitation for conflict between the president and the Senate.

Selection Criteria.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was nominated to fill the position vacated by Thurgood Marshall. He served on the U.S. Court of Appeals before his nomination to the Supreme Court by George Bush.

Presidents must consider many factors in making their choices for federal judgeships:

Experience — Most nominees have had substantial judicial or governmental experience, either on the state or federal level. Many have law degrees or some other form of higher education.

Political ideology — Presidents usually appoint judges who seem to have a similar political ideology to their own. In other words, a president with a liberal ideology will usually appoint liberals to the courts. Likewise, conservative presidents tend to appoint conservatives.

Party and personal loyalties — A remarkably high percentage of a resident’s appointees belong to the president’s political party. Although political favoritism is less common today than it was a few decades ago, presidents still appoint friends and loyal supporters to federal judgeships.

Ethnicity and gender — Until relatively recently, almost all federal judges were white males. Today, however, ethnicity and gender are important criteria for appointing judges. In 1967, Lyndon Johnson appointed the first African American Supreme Court justice, Thurgood Marshall. In 1981, Ronald Reagan appointed the first woman to the Supreme Court, Sandra Day O’Connor. All recent presidents have appointed African Americans, Latinos, members of other ethnic minority groups, and women to district courts and courts of appeal.

Because federal judges and Supreme Court justices serve for life, a president’s nomination decisions are in many ways his or her most important legacy. Many of these appointments will serve long after a president’s term of office ends. Whether or not the results are a “combination of Justinian, Jesus Christ, and John Marshall,” these choices can have an impact on generations to come.


3. Federalism

Before the Constitution was written, each state had its own currency. This four pound note from Philadelphia reads, “To Counterfeit is Death.”

Did you ever wonder why you don’t need a passport to go from New York to California, but if you were to move from one state to another, you would need a new driver’s license? Or why you can use the same currency in all states, but not be subject to the same speed limits? Or why you have to pay both federal and state taxes?
The maze of national and state regulations results from federalism — the decision made by the Founders to split power between state and national governments. As James Madison explained in the “Federalist Papers,” our government is “neither wholly national nor wholly federal.”

Federalism as a System of Government

In creating a federalist system the founders were reacting to both the British government and the Articles of Confederation. The British government was — and remains — a UNITARY SYSTEM, or one in which power is concentrated in a central government. In England, government has traditionally been centralized in London, and even though local governments exist, they generally have only those powers granted them by Parliament. The national government is supreme, and grants or retains powers to and from local governments at its whim.

The Russian Federation, also known simply as Russia, has a federal government with a variety of partially self-governing autonomous regions, or oblasts. Most of these, such as the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, are concentrations of non-Russian ethnic groups.

The Articles of Confederation represented an opposite form of government, a CONFEDERATION, which has a weak central government and strong state governments. In a confederation, the state or local government is supreme. The national government only wields powers granted by the states. Most confederations have allowed the local government to nullify a federal law within its own borders.

Federalism is a compromise meant to eliminate the disadvantages of both systems. In a federal system, power is shared by the national and state governments. The Constitution designates certain powers to be the domain of a central government, and others are specifically reserved to the state governments.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Unitary and Confederal Governments

The European Union has a multinational parliament which has regular sessions just as a national parliament would. A major issue in Europe today is what this body gets to decide and what remains under the jurisdiction of national governments.

 UnitaryConfederalAdvantagesLaws may be applied uniformly to allLaws may be made to suit individual needs of the statesGovernmentEfforts seldom duplicate or contradict themselvesTyranny can be avoided more easilyDecision-makingFast and efficientGovernment is closer to the peopleDisadvantagesConcentration of power can lead to tyranny
If the country is large, a distant central government can lose control
Central officials may not always understand the needs of their citizens
State governments are susceptible to quarrels
The country has a tendency to split apart
Sub-governments may lack resources that a central government has
Although the federal system seems to strike a perfect balance of power between national and local needs, federations still have internal power struggles. Conflicts between national and state governments are common. In the case of the United States, the argument of state vs. federal power was a major underlying factor that led to the CIVIL WAR.
Fewer than thirty modern countries have federal systems today, including Australia, Canada, Germany, Mexico, and the United States. But even though few other countries practice it today, federalism has provided the balance that the United States has needed since 1787.


“Off with his head!”

Louis XIV, the King of France from 1643 until 1715, is the definition of an absolute monarch. His famous phrase, “I am the State,” is an illustration of the power he wielded in France. Louis ruled through a mixture of fear and admiration, but in every case the law extended from himself.

“Off with his head!”
This is a favorite story line to show how cruel a king (or a sultan or emperor) can be. The rules in this type of government are pretty clear. Whatever the ruler says, goes. Of course, many people have had different ideas about how the ruler should govern, and those beliefs support totally different types of government. The rules shape the government’s LEGITIMACY, or the degree to which the people accept the authority of the government.

Rule by Man

Niccolo Machiavelli wrote political works during the Renaissance. In The Prince, Machiavelli advised his audience that in a system of Rule by Man it was “better to be feared than loved.

Countries whose CITIZENS are governed by the absolute decisions of the ruler have not necessarily been unhappy. A government whose king or queen rules justly and wisely may enjoy a great deal of legitimacy as long as the ruler’s AUTHORITY is accepted. Sometimes people may accept their leader because they are afraid of the consequences if they don’t. In the words of MACHIAVELLI, “It is better to be feared than loved.” As long as the feared ruler is seen as bringing about prosperity or protecting the lives of his subjects, it is entirely possible that his people will be happy.

Rule by Law

Napoleon revised the French laws into a single unified code, known as the Code Napoleon. Under the French Empire, the code was implemented throughout Europe. Napoleon is seen in this painting standing next to a copy of the Code written on a scroll.

RULE BY LAW exists in any political system in which those with power cannot make up all their own rules, but must follow an established CODE OF LAW. In ancient times a Byzantine emperor established JUSTINIAN’S CODE, a set of laws named after him that lived on long after he died. We still follow parts of that code today. The Romans were also known for codifying laws, as was NAPOLEON, Emperor of France, many centuries later.

Today most governments at least claim to be ruled by law. The most common indication is the existence of a written constitution, but the most important question to ask is whether or not the constitution actually is the “blueprint” that determines how and what policies are made. For example, Nigeria officially is a democracy with a written constitution that one dictator after another has ignored. On the other hand, Great Britain has never had a constitution as a single written document, but has for centuries been governed by law. For much of their history, the English had a limited monarchy, or a king or queen who has followed rule of law.
So whether a king can order “off with his head!” depends on the type of government that is accepted in his country. If he sets the rules (rule by man), or if the accepted outside rules allow (rule by law), the victim doesn’t have a chance.

//Guarantees Criminal Case//

Guarantee Criminal Case

Anyone can suspect a crime. People arrested on suspicion of a crime have the right to bail provided for under international law and our constitution (FDRE cons 17 (2)). The right to bail is a guarantee that people arrested on suspicion of a crime will be released from detention without being detained for a period of time (warranty | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal InformationInstitute).
– Provided by the school
1st: Guarantee by the police (Article 28 of the Penal Code)

-If you are suspected of a crime punishable by up to 3 years in prison

-If you do not have enough information to suspect that you have committed a crime or that you have committed a crime, you will be signed by the Investigating Police or a bail bond will be set.
2nd: Court Guarantee (Article 63)

– The offense carries a maximum penalty of 15 years’ imprisonment

– This guarantee is only granted if the person injured by the crime does not die.
Not only this, with regard to Article 69 (2) (a) of the Penal Code, the courts must consider the possibility of granting bail.
If the suspect is released, it will not cause problems in gathering evidence (if it does not persuade witnesses)
If I comply with the obligation
If not a threat to public order
If you do not commit another crime
If not a recurring criminal
If the suspect’s address is not far away or out of the country, I may be granted bail.
The bail application can be filed with any court in accordance with Article 64. Although the amount of bail is determined by the court, the court will take into account the severity of the crime, the appointment, the amount of property and the duration of the bail.
Failure to comply with warranty obligation
If the defendant does not appear on the appointment, bail will be paid to the government and the missing defendant will be forced to appear at the police station. He will then be kept in custody until a decision is made (Article 73 (23)).

።።።።።።።// የዋስትና በወንጀል ጉዳይ //።።።።።።።።
ማንኛውም ሰው በወንጀል ልጠረጠር ይችላል። በወንጀል ተጠርጥረው የተያዙ ሰዎች ደግሞ በአለማቀፍ ህግና በህገመንግስታችን የተደነገገ የዋስትና መብት አለው(FDRE cons 17(2))። የዋስትና መብት ማለት ደግሞ በወንጀል ተጠርጥሮ የተያዙ ሰዎች ለጊዜ ተለቀው ሳይታሰሩ ጉዳያቸውን ከውጭ ሆነው እንድከታተሉና በተፈለጉበት ሰዓት ለመገኘት የምሰጠው ማረጋገጫ ነው(warranty | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal InformationInstitute)።

ዋስትና ደግሞ በሁለት መንገድ ይሰጣል

-በፖሊስ የሚሰጥና
-በፍ/ቤት የሚሰጥ
1ኛ፦በፖሊስ የሚሰጥ ዋስትና (የወ/ሥ/ሥ/ሕ/አንቀፅ 28)
-እስከ 3አመት ቀላል እስራት የምያስቀጣ ወንጀል የተጠረጠሬ ከሆነ

-ወንጀሉ ስለመሠራቱ አጠራጣሪ ሁነታ ስገጥም ወይም ወንጀል ሰርቷል የምያስብል በቂ መረጃ ስታጣ በመርማሪ ፖልስ አስፈርሞ ወይም የገንዘብ ዋስ የምሆን ዋስትና ወረቀት በማስፈረም የምቀርብበትን ቀን ወስኖ ይለቃል።
2ኛ፦በፍ/ቤት የምሰጥ ዋስትና (የወ/ሥ/ሥ/ሕ/አንቀፅ 63

-ወንጀሉ ከ15አመት በታች ጽኑ እስራት የምያስቀጣ ስሆንና

-በወንጀል የተጎዳ ሰው የማይሞት ከሆነ ነው ይህ ዋስትና የሚፈቀደው።
ይህ ብቻ አይደለም የወ/ሥ/ሥ/ሕ/አንቀፅ 69(2(ሀ-መ) እንደተደነገገው ፍ/ቤቶች ዋስትና ለመፍቀድ ማገናዘብ ያለባቸው ነገሮች ውስጥ
ተጠርጣሪ ከተለቀቀ በማስረጃ አሰባሰብ ላይ ችግር የማይፈጥር ከሆነ(ሚስክሮችን የማያባብል ከሆነ)
ግዴታውን አክብሮ የምቀርብ ከሆነ
ለህዝብ ጸጥታ አስግ ካልሆነ
ሌላ ወንጀል የማይፈጽሙ ከሆነ
ተደጋጋሚ ወንጀለኛ ካልሆነ
የተጠርጣሪ አድራሻ ሩቅ ካልሆነ ወይም ከሀገር የማይወጣ ከሆነ የዋስትና መብት ልከበርለት ይችላል ።
የዋስትናውን አቤቱታ በ64 መሠረት ለማንኛውም ፍ/ቤት ማቅረብ ወይም ማመልከት ይቻላል።የዋስትና መያዣ መጠን በፍ/ቤት የምወሰን ብሆንም የወንጀሉ ከባድነት ፣ ቀጠሮ አክባሪነት ፣የሀብት መጠኑ እና የዋስትና ቆይታ ጊዜ ፍ/ቤቱ ከግንዛቤ ውስጥ ያስገባል ።
የዋስትና ግደታ ያለማክበር
ተከሳሽ በቀጠሮ ቀን ካልቀረበ የዋስትና ገንዘብ ለመንግስት ገብ ይደረግና ያልቀረበ ተከሳሽ በፖሊስ ተገዶ እንድቀርብ ይደረጋል ። ከዚያም ለላ ከባድ ዋስትና ይገባል ካልሆነ ውሳኔ እስክአገኝ ድረስ ማረፍያ ቤት ይቆያል (የወ/ሥ/ሥ/ሕ/አንቀፅ 73(23¾)።

The letter Abiy’s puppet(AG) wrote to block medical treatment of Bekele Gerba was brought to court today. Attorney General tried to hide what was already delivered to court. He tried to intimidate prison officials to hide the letter but the brave officers delivered it to court.

The letter Abiy’s puppet(AG) wrote to block medical treatment of Bekele Gerba was brought to court today. Attorney General tried to hide what was already delivered to court. He tried to intimidate prison officials to hide the letter but the brave officers delivered it to court.

What are the 3 types of dictatorships?

What are the 3 types of dictatorships?

Between the two world wars, three types of dictatorships have been described: constitutional, counterrevolutionary and fascist. Since World War II, a broader range of dictatorships has been recognized, including Third World dictatorships, theocratic or religious dictatorships and dynastic or family-based dictatorships.

Characteristics. Authoritarianism is characterized by highly concentrated and centralized government power maintained by political repression and the exclusion of potential challengers. It uses political parties and mass organizations to mobilize people around the goals of the regime.

Dictatorships are often characterised by some of the following: suspension of elections and civil liberties; proclamation of a state of emergency; rule by decree; repression of political opponents; not abiding by the rule of law procedures, and cult of personality.

A young rickshaw operator in Jigjiga returns a cash of Birr 300,000 ($7,436) left in the rickshaw to the lucky owner. A mother was the owner of the money, she wanted to use the money to seek medical help for herself and a sick son (she sold some of her livestock to get the cash)

A young rickshaw operator in Jigjiga returns a cash of Birr 300,000 ($7,436) left in the rickshaw to the lucky owner. A mother was the owner of the money, she wanted to use the money to seek medical help for herself and a sick son (she sold some of her livestock to get the cash)

A young rickshaw operator in Jigjiga returns a cash of Birr 300,000 ($7,436) left in the rickshaw to the lucky owner. A mother was the owner of the money, she wanted to use the money to seek medical help for herself and a sick son (she sold some of her livestock to get the cash)