If, at the end of the proceeding, it becomes clear that the defendant can be convicted only on the basis of the testimonies of the state's witnesses, and only if the court gives credence to their testimony, only then will there be room to discuss the question of whether there is room to grant the corporation the right to remain silent and the right against self-incrimination and to examine whether the testimonies of the state's witnesses violate the defendant's right to self-incrimination, since it should be remembered that this is not a case in which the defendant is summoned to an interrogation or to the court and claims non-self-incrimination. Rather, in a situation in which the state's witnesses spoke, and now the defendant claims that their very testimony constitutes a violation of the right to refrain from self-incrimination. In this regard, it should be emphasized further that the defendant claimed that she cooperated in the investigation and provided all the documents in her possession, and in this regard, too, the question arises as to whether she is now entitled to claim that her right not to incriminate herself has been violated. However, as stated, these matters will be clarified only at the end of the main proceeding.
I will now discuss the remedies given for violating the fairness of the proceeding – invalidation of evidence and remedies granted by virtue of the defense from justice, including the cancellation of the indictment, to which the defendant petitions. However, as explained above, at this stage it is not possible to determine whether the defendant's right to a fair trial was violated at all. Therefore, in this matter as well, I will discuss the considerations that must be taken into account, and I will leave their implementation to the end of the main proceeding, to the extent that it is necessary to do so at the end of the proceeding.
- On the remedies for violation of due process: invalidation of evidence and remedies by virtue of the defense of justice
The question is what is the remedy in a case where the right of a defendant to a fair trial is violated. The defendant asks the court to grant her two alternative remedies. The first is the cancellation of the indictment due to a defense from justice, and at the very least because by virtue of this defense the organs will not be allowed to testify against it, and the second is that the evidence or statements given by the organs against it are disqualified from serving as evidence against it at trial.