Vehicular Searches by the Police: Conflicting of Police Procedures with Law-Based Investigations

Vehicular searches at the checkpoints and police stations are the best examples of the conflict between the practical procedures of police with law-based investigations. The present study tries to analyze, justify and explain the conflict between police procedure and law-based investigations by focusing on criminal statistics, judgments of criminal tribunals and police guidelines and etc. and identify the existing gaps and ultimately solve the problem. The present research is a descriptive-analytic method and by using a library tool is trying to answer the question whether current procedure of officers in the field of vehicle search is in accordance with legal regulations and rules. Officers in flagrant offences have many powers in the field of searching and warrant of arrest (warrant of commitment of persons) and objects but they do not have these powers in non-flagrant offences and only have the duty to inform the prosecutor. Officers cannot search for unseen parts of the vehicle without (without a warrant or probable cause) prosecution authority’s prior order and strong conjecture of a crime occurrence. Delegating more powers to officers through strong conjecture (UK), separating the vehicles from general regulations of inspection and search of places and means (France) and more effective use of oral order (Article 34 of Code of Criminal Procedure) are among the solutions that can be presented in order to address the current challenge from a comparative perspective, but until the amendment of the law, the existing disciplinary procedure is against the principle of the legality of criminal proceedings and citizenship rights and the initiated criminal prosecution must be abated (the interruption of a legal proceeding).