English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In the absence of statutory rules on the matter, Belgian courts traditionally applied a strict exclusionary rule for illegally gathered evidence and its fruits. The Court of Cassation in 2003 made a spectacular U-turn and prohibited exclusion of illegally obtained evidence by criminal courts, with only very limited exceptions. Parliament subsequently incorporated these judge-made principles 1 Professor at the Institute of Criminal Law (KU Leuven). Doctor in Law. 2 Doctor in Law, Lawyer at Stibbe Brussels and Voluntary Academic Assistant at the Institute of Criminal Law (KU Leuven). 274 | VerBrUggen; ConIngs. Rev. Bras. de Direito Processual Penal, Porto Alegre, v. 7, n. 1, p. 273-310, jan.-abr. 2021. into a binding statutory rule. As a new Code is about to be debated in Parliament, the time is right to question the “normalisation” of law enforcement officers’ disrespect for the rules. The rule of Law will be restored by making exclusion of illegally gathered evidence the rule, but exceptionally allowing its use upon consideration of the conflicting interests.

After Zigzagging Between Extremes, Finally Common Sense? Will Belgium Return to Reasonable Rules on Illegally Obtained Evidence?