HUMAN RIGHTS RELATING TO EXERCISING AUTHORITY IN CASE OF IDENTIFYING CRIME SCENE INCIDENT

Abstract

Human rights are the rights which are given to all the human beings by birth and must be respected as fundamental and rights of human. There should not consider any distinction or discrimination in nationalities, ethnic, origin, race, language, gender, age, disability, religious belief, cultural background or education. All the human beings are equal with no limitations. Their freedom and liberty shall be guaranteed in any case without borders. It is untouchable and there should not be any person, organization or state institution allowed to intervene into the people’s liberty and human rights. In addition to that, it is necessary that individual could live their life properly under adequate standard as human being. For that reason, it is emphasised that they can enforce their right to facilitate their own interests to attain the obtaining of basic education, nationality naturalization, receiving public health services thoroughly, being treated fairly and not being tortured. These include the right to obtain an appropriate justification of crime committing procedure. As social creature, the society environment needs to support human development for effectively succeed. Consequently, human rights should be applied tremendously in order facilitate the valuable rights of being human and to corporate the relationships between people. Moreover, the states should not demolish such rights as well. Therefore, the applicable of human rights would constitute fundamental living and peaceful within the society. An investigation officer action should be bound by the human rights adjustment under the Criminal Procedure Act for compiling an evidence including the interrogated, arrested or an action involve their duties. Nevertheless, the regulations that allowed the officer to bring an allege offender to the crime scene incident for the pointing after accepting the offence could deprive an officer action from the human rights enforcement. The human rights would be violated when the investigation officer misconduct the presumption of legal or the principle of not bounding not to betray themselves including the rights to remain silence. This is the main reason why many former practices of the investigative officer are considered to be treated as irresponsible and compose an issues to the National Police Office in reliable under the compensation for the infringement of liability arising from the misconduct of the investigation officer. Therefore, the author would like to suggest the scope of an appropriate investigation practiced by the officer on behalf of the state attorney. The author suggests furthermore an appropriate and international standard practice in terms of using the power in cases of investigating and gleaning evidences and proves. The power used by the investigation officer must be preserved in pursuance of the suspects’ fundamental rights during the custody to comply with the international human rights principles and related laws. The author also recommends if necessary, to revise the laws and procedures to ensure the fundamental rights within the international standard in future practices