The Supreme Court has stated its position regarding the civil liability for the violation of the right to the presumption of innocence.
According to information provided to Modern.az by the Court, the Supreme Court for the first time has clarified important points regarding the violation of the right to the presumption of innocence in its Plenary decision on “Protection of Personal Rights”.
It was stated that the presumption of innocence prohibits the use of confirmatory statements or the dissemination of information regarding a person's guilt without a legally binding conviction against them. This prohibition also covers the period of preliminary investigation and judicial inquiry: "This means that a person is considered guilty of committing a criminal act only if there is a court judgment convicting them and that judgment has entered into legal force. The main purpose of the presumption of innocence is to prevent undue pressure and influence on persons carrying out criminal proceedings (investigator, interrogator, prosecutor, judge) and to ensure an objective trial of the person. In this regard, especially when articles are published in the media, attention should be paid to this issue, and confirmatory statements regarding the commission of any crime by a person should be avoided without a legally binding judgment on their guilt".
It was noted that the violation of the presumption of innocence, guaranteed by Article 63 of the Constitution, is conditioned by the simultaneous existence of 2 circumstances: "The absence of a legally binding conviction against the person; the use of confirmatory statements or the dissemination of information regarding the person's guilt in committing a criminal act. For example, the publication of an article in the media stating “A person named A defrauded person B and stole 10,000 manats from them,” or “An official named A committed a corruption crime by taking a bribe of 100,000 manats from person B for the purpose of providing them with employment,” violates the presumption of innocence of person “A” if there is no legally binding conviction by the court against them".
The Supreme Court believes that a person whose right to the presumption of innocence has been unlawfully interfered with can put forward demands for both the application of methods for the protection of this right and compensation for moral damage arising from the violation of this right: "Since the violation of the right to the presumption of innocence results in the tarnishing of a person's honor, dignity, and business reputation, its protection methods also constitute methods for the protection of honor, dignity, and business reputation (one or more may be applied): establishing the violation; preventing the violation (preventing or prohibiting the dissemination of information); eliminating the violation (refuting, deleting, correcting, or responding to disseminated information, apologizing, publishing a court decision on the legal violation in the media, etc.); other methods. (for example, the method of publishing a court decision on the legal violation in the media when it is not possible to identify the person who disseminated information tarnishing honor, dignity, personal, and business reputation, i.e., the defendant).
A person can put forward the listed demands from the moment the presumption of innocence is violated. Even if a conviction is subsequently issued against the person and enters into legal force, the right to claim does not cease to exist. Because, at the time when confirmatory statements regarding the commission of a criminal act were used or information was disseminated, there was no legally binding judgment. However, the stage of criminal proceedings at which the right to the presumption of innocence is violated is significant in terms of the extent of moral damage inflicted. For example, compared to the preliminary investigation stage, the dissemination of confirmatory information regarding a person's commission of a crime after a conviction is issued by the court of first instance in a criminal case will result in a lesser amount of moral damage being inflicted upon them".
