Studia Prawnicze. Rozprawy i Materiały / Studies in Law: Research Papers

Abstract

Only one article, i.e. 74 § 3a of the Code of Criminal Procedure, pro vides in the Criminal Procedure Act for the possibility of using direct coercive measures in the form of physical force and technical means of overpowering, without defining what they are. Moreover, no article of the Code of Criminal Procedure refers to the provisions of the Act on Direct Coercive Measures and Firearm in matters related to the issue of using these measures. The analysis conducted provides grounds for considering that the catalogue of direct coercive measures provided for in Article 74 § 3a of the Code of Criminal Procedure, used exclusively for the purpose of enforcing the fulfilment of evidentiary obligations provided for in Article 74 § 2 and 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, include: physical force in the form of transportation and overpower ing techniques (when the person is not behaving aggressively); tech nical means in the form of handcuffs placed on the hands, feet or those joined together. Moreover, the author supports the postulate raised in the scien tific community related to the need to remove the misleading term ‘technical means’ in favor of handcuffs and suggests that it would be worth considering expanding the catalog of these means to include a multifunctional baton of the tonfa type. Moreover – following other representatives of the doctrine – he raises another postulate regarding the regulation in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the issue of the use of direct coercion measures or at least the introduction of appropriate provisions referring to the Act on Direct Coercive Measures and Fire arm.