Can An Inspector Be A Witness

Quite often, being in court, you can see where the traffic police inspector who is present at the meeting on matters related to the offense on the road. As far as I know, they are called as witnesses. Can the traffic police inspector, prepared the protocol, to be a witness? According to Section 1, Art. 25.06 Administrative Code as a witness in the case of an administrative offense may be caused by a person who may be aware of the circumstances of the case, subject to disclosure. Thus, this article and the Administrative Code as a whole does not prohibit participation in such matters, traffic police officers. However, one should pay attention to the explanation given in paragraph 10 of Resolution of the Plenum of the Russian Armed Forces from 24.03.2005 5 About Some issues arising in courts in applying the Code of Administrative Offences. ” According to this explanation: “bodies and officials who made the protocol on administrative violation, are not parties to the production of Cases of Administrative Offences, the range of which are listed in Chapter 25, Code of Administrative Offences, “but further stated:”

However, in cases of involvement of persons liable for an administrative offense, as well as complaints and protests against decisions on administrative violations in the case need not exclude the possibility of summoning the persons to clarify the issues raised. ” Thus, it can be concluded that the traffic police, amounting to a protocol can not be a witness in the same case, since it has a direct interest in the outcome of the case. So, as if someone performs the traffic police in the process? It is not a party to the case, and accordingly is not a witness or any other person specified in Sec. 25 cao and bringing him as any of the persons referred to in Sec. 25 cao is neo basnovannym. Most likely, the role of Inspector in court – this clarification the circumstances of the case. However, keep in mind that the inspector – a person concerned, in that his testimony should be treated more critically. Unfortunately, as often happens, the judge considers these statements as they should, ie which there is no reason not to trust, which in turn is a violation of Art. 26.11 ‘No evidence can be predetermined by ‘ If you combine these nuances when considering an administrative case, then there is a possibility of appeal with the possibility of cancellation made by the court acts.