Kai kurie ikiteisminio tyrimo duomenų neskelbtinumo aspektai

Abstract

According to the constitutional doctrine, the objective truth in the criminal process is one of the most important goals. Homo sapiens life is inseparable from the information that they are searching for, receipt and dissemination. Among the permanent members of the public discourse takes place, and such data exchange dichotomy has simply unquestionable. The right to information is not the absolute right. A person’s right to information, public information becomes public. Same data secrecy presupposes abstraction: minimum – maximum, but nothing has fundamentally alters the fact that it is rounding of concept of public prosecutor in criminal proceedings and do not determinate the outcome of a purely positive definition. But the question is how much data the prosecutor has a pre-trial judge, except in special cases of murder complicity, in such forms as an organized group or criminal organization? Where the boundary between the pre-trial process (and thus the truth of guilt of criminal conviction) and the suspect and this council have the right to know? Where is the beginning of public’s right to know and the satisfaction of curiosity when threatened violation of the right of privacy. How to evaluate the de jure cases where procedural form servants „losing“ part of the pre-trial investigation is not listed?