The right not to testify against itself in practice of the European court of human rights
69 35
Keywords:
The European court, the witness privileges self-incriminating indications, the right to protection, fair judicial proceedingsAbstract
In article are analyzed the most important decisions of the European court of the human rights, the concerning rights not to testify against themselves. Evolution of case practice of Court shows that there are some concepts of this right, and the Court not always consistently adheres to one of them. The main problem is exact determination of nature of the right not to testify against itself in relation to widespread cases of coercion to a cooperation with the investigation, for example – to issue of documents and receiving expert samples. Attempts of the European Court to carry out accurate distinction between oral indications and other proofs look unconvincingly. In particular, the criterion of “objectivity” applied by Court not always allows to define precisely limits of action and the content of the estimated right of the applicant. Some decisions contain inconsistent legal positions that causes need of further efforts on the solution of this problem.References
1 See the Funke v. France Judgment of the European Court of human right, 25 February 1993.
2 See the J. B. v. Switzerland Judgment of the European Court of human right, 3 May 2001.
3 See the John Murray v. the United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 8 February 1996.
4 See the Saunders v. the United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 17 December 1996.
5 See the Serves v. France Judgment of the European Court of human right, 20 October 1997.
6 See the Heaney and McGuinness v. Ireland Judgment of the European Court of human right, 21 December 2000.
7 See the Weh v. Austria Judgment of the European Court of human right, 8 April 2004.
8 See the Shannon v. the United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 4 October 2005.
9 See the Jalloh v. Germany Judgment of the European Court of human right, 11 July 2006.
10 See the O’Halloran and Francis v. United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 29 June 2007.
11 See the Allen v. the United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 30 Mach 2010.
12 See the Bykov v. Russia Judgment of the European Court of human right, 10 Mach 2009.
13 See the Heglas v. the Czech Republic Judgment of the European Court of human right, 1 Mach 2007.
2 See the J. B. v. Switzerland Judgment of the European Court of human right, 3 May 2001.
3 See the John Murray v. the United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 8 February 1996.
4 See the Saunders v. the United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 17 December 1996.
5 See the Serves v. France Judgment of the European Court of human right, 20 October 1997.
6 See the Heaney and McGuinness v. Ireland Judgment of the European Court of human right, 21 December 2000.
7 See the Weh v. Austria Judgment of the European Court of human right, 8 April 2004.
8 See the Shannon v. the United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 4 October 2005.
9 See the Jalloh v. Germany Judgment of the European Court of human right, 11 July 2006.
10 See the O’Halloran and Francis v. United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 29 June 2007.
11 See the Allen v. the United Kingdom Judgment of the European Court of human right, 30 Mach 2010.
12 See the Bykov v. Russia Judgment of the European Court of human right, 10 Mach 2009.
13 See the Heglas v. the Czech Republic Judgment of the European Court of human right, 1 Mach 2007.
Downloads
Issue
Section
International relations and foreign policy
