The Principle of Transparency and the Social Perception of the Representatives of Pre-Trial Procedure Authorities

Social judgments regarding the assessment of the work of the representatives of the preparatory proceedings organs are often formulated prematurely. Actions taken in favor of properly conducted proceedings often require commitment, which is difficult to qualify in specific assessment categories. Advances in technology mean that committing offences is often simpler, resulting in the possibility of committing more and more new crimes (including, among others, cybercrime). Such realities oblige the representatives of the procedural authorities to take effective remedial actions to combat criminogenic behavior, which sometimes correlates with taking actions that are on the fringes of the law or ethics (among others, Art. 168 a and 168 b of KPK (the Code of Criminal Procedure)). The effectiveness of the preparatory proceedings carried out is therefore dependent on many factors, the derivative of which is the decision of the trial resolution, which, in the theoretical assumption, should meet not only the statutory objectives of the proceedings, but also be a testimony to achieve a social sense of justice. The stereotypical verification of the work of prosecutors and the Police officers makes it difficult to make a proper assessment of the actions taken by them, thus distorting the actual image of the bodies of proceedings. The subject and purpose of this study is to emphasize the social perception of the representatives of the organs of preparatory proceedings. The theoretical reflections were formulated on the basis of the developed conclusions from the analysis of the court files examined.