ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE IN THE ACCUSATORIAL SYSTEM AND INQUISITORIAL SYSTEM

Abstract

            This academic article aims to study the principles of hearing evidence in the accusation system and the inquiry system in order to compare the different forms of the accusation system and the inquiry system of courts in Thailand and other countries for the purpose of improving the law. On the principles of hearing evidence in courts in Thailand, it is found that Regulations at the General Assembly of Judges of the Supreme Administrative Court on Administrative Court Procedures, 2000, Article 68, which are similar to the Civil Procedure Code and Criminal Procedure Code on the principles of listening to evidence, especially the flawed evidence which requires the court to listen with caution, the evidence should not be believed alone to convict the defendant unless there is a strong reason. There are special circumstances of the case or other supporting evidence.  It is of the opinion that Article 68 of the Rules of the General Assembly of Judges of the Supreme Administrative Court does not correspond with Administrative Court Procedures B.E. because it is a system that gives the courts the power to hear evidence widely even if it is an investigation of evidence that has errors deviating from the procedure, method or time frame specified by law. Since the court plays an important role in finding out the truth beyond the outcome of the verdict, this principle is consistent with the judicial system under Section 27 of the Organic Act on the Procedures of the Constitutional Court.

            From the study, it is suggested that Article 68 of the Rules of the General Assembly of Judges of the Supreme Administrative Court on Administrative Court Procedure, 2000 should be revised.