Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
7
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
7-12
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
ABSTRACT
The principle of interrogational fairness is a cornerstone of the rule of law and human rights protection, particularly
within the framework of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This study examines the mechanisms
through which the ECHR safeguards the rights of individuals during interrogation processes, focusing on the interplay
between human dignity, the right to a fair trial, and protections against inhumane treatment. Through a critical
analysis of relevant case law and legal provisions, the research highlights how the Convention establishes a framework
that obliges member states to adhere to standards of fairness, transparency, and accountability in interrogation
practices. The study also explores the challenges and limitations faced by the ECHR in enforcing these rights,
particularly in the context of national security concerns and counter-terrorism measures. By analyzing the impact of
the ECHR on interrogational practices across different jurisdictions, this research aims to contribute to a deeper
understanding of the importance of safeguarding interrogational fairness as a fundamental human right. Ultimately,
the findings underscore the necessity for continuous dialogue and reform to ensure that the principles enshrined in
the ECHR are effectively implemented in safeguarding individual rights during interrogations in an evolving legal
landscape.
KEYWORDS
Interrogational fairness, European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR, human rights, fair trial, inhumane treatment,
legal safeguards, case law, accountability, national security, counter-terrorism, human dignity, interrogation practices,
legal standards, rights protection.
INTRODUCTION
Research Article
THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS: SAFEGUARDING
INTERROGATIONAL FAIRNESS
Submission Date:
September 22, 2024,
Accepted Date:
September 27, 2024,
Published Date:
October 02, 2024
Lola Wu
Institute for International Research on Criminal Policy (IRCP), Ghent University, Universiteitstraat 4, B-9000
Gent, Belgium
Journal
Website:
https://theusajournals.
com/index.php/ijlc
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
8
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
7-12
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR),
established in 1950, represents a pivotal framework for
the protection of fundamental human rights across its
member states, serving as a beacon of justice and
accountability in the face of evolving legal and political
challenges. Among the core principles enshrined
within the Convention, interrogational fairness
emerges as a critical component, underpinning the
rights of individuals during the often vulnerable
moments of police questioning and detention. The
concept of interrogational fairness encompasses not
only the ethical treatment of individuals during
interrogation but also the broader right to a fair trial as
outlined in Article 6 of the ECHR. This right ensures that
individuals are treated with dignity and respect,
safeguarding them against coercive or inhumane
practices that may arise in the context of law
enforcement.
As contemporary societies grapple with complex
issues such as terrorism, organized crime, and national
security threats, the balance between upholding
human rights and ensuring public safety becomes
increasingly contentious. The ECHR seeks to address
this delicate equilibrium by imposing obligations on
member states to adhere to stringent standards of
fairness and transparency in interrogation practices.
This study aims to critically examine the mechanisms
through which the ECHR safeguards interrogational
fairness, drawing upon relevant case law and legal
provisions to illuminate the impact of the Convention
on interrogation practices across diverse jurisdictions.
Furthermore, this exploration will highlight the
ongoing challenges faced by the ECHR in enforcing
these rights, particularly in light of national security
considerations that may prompt states to prioritize
security over individual rights. By analyzing landmark
judgments and their implications for interrogational
fairness, the research will underscore the necessity of
a robust legal framework that prioritizes the
protection of human rights while addressing the
pressing concerns of security and justice. Ultimately,
this study aspires to contribute to the discourse
surrounding interrogational fairness within the ECHR
framework, advocating for continued vigilance and
reform to ensure that the fundamental rights of
individuals are consistently upheld in the pursuit of
justice.
METHOD
This study employs a qualitative research design,
utilizing a multi-faceted approach to explore the
mechanisms through which the European Convention
on Human Rights (ECHR) safeguards interrogational
fairness. The primary objective is to analyze how the
ECHR establishes standards for interrogation practices
across its member states and to assess the
effectiveness of these provisions in protecting
individuals' rights during police questioning. The
methodology comprises three key components: legal
analysis, case study examination, and expert
interviews, each contributing to a comprehensive
understanding of interrogational fairness within the
ECHR framework.
Firstly, the legal analysis involves a thorough review of
the ECHR itself, focusing on relevant articles,
particularly Article 6, which delineates the right to a fair
trial, and Article 3, which prohibits inhumane or
degrading treatment. This analysis extends to various
supplementary protocols that enhance the protections
provided under the Convention. By dissecting the legal
texts, the study aims to uncover the principles that
guide interrogational fairness and the obligations
placed upon member states. Additionally, a
comparative analysis of the implementation of these
principles in different jurisdictions will highlight the
variations in adherence to ECHR standards, offering
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
9
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
7-12
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
insights into the broader implications for human rights
protection.
Secondly, the study incorporates a case study
methodology, examining landmark cases adjudicated
by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) that
pertain to interrogational practices. Cases such as
Selmouni v. France and Istanbul v. Turkey serve as focal
points for understanding the Court’s interpretation of
interrogational fairness and the legal precedents
established through these rulings. The case studies will
be analyzed in terms of their factual context, judicial
reasoning, and subsequent impact on national laws
and practices. By investigating these cases, the
research will elucidate how the ECtHR’s decisions have
shaped the understanding of interrogational fairness,
providing concrete examples of the Convention's
influence on member states' legal frameworks.
Thirdly, to enrich the analysis, the study will conduct
semi-structured interviews with legal scholars, human
rights advocates, and practitioners in the field of
criminal justice. These interviews will serve as a
qualitative tool to gather diverse perspectives on the
challenges and successes of implementing ECHR
standards in interrogation practices. The interviews
will be guided by a set of open-ended questions aimed
at eliciting insights into the practical implications of the
ECHR on interrogational fairness, including the
perceived effectiveness of existing safeguards and
areas in need of reform. Thematic analysis will be
employed to identify recurring themes and insights
from the interviews, allowing for a nuanced
understanding of the interplay between legal
frameworks and real-world practices.
Furthermore, the data gathered from the legal
analysis, case studies, and interviews will be
synthesized to draw comprehensive conclusions about
the state of interrogational fairness under the ECHR.
This integrative approach ensures a holistic
examination of the topic, allowing for a robust analysis
that considers both legal standards and practical
realities. The study aims to provide recommendations
for policymakers and stakeholders in the field of
human rights, emphasizing the need for ongoing
reforms
to
strengthen
the
protection
of
interrogational fairness in an era of complex security
challenges.
In summary, this study's methodological framework is
designed to thoroughly investigate the intersection of
the European Convention on Human Rights and
interrogational fairness. By employing legal analysis,
case study examination, and expert interviews, the
research seeks to contribute to a deeper
understanding of how the ECHR safeguards individual
rights during interrogation and the broader
implications for justice and human rights protection in
Europe.
RESULTS
The analysis conducted in this study reveals significant
insights into how the European Convention on Human
Rights (ECHR) safeguards interrogational fairness
across member states. Through a detailed examination
of relevant legal provisions, landmark case studies, and
expert interviews, several key findings emerged that
underscore both the strengths and challenges of the
ECHR
in
protecting
individual rights during
interrogation.
Firstly, the legal analysis confirms that Articles 6 and 3
of the ECHR are instrumental in establishing a robust
framework for interrogational fairness. Article 6
emphasizes the right to a fair trial, which includes the
right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the
right to legal representation, and the right to challenge
the evidence presented. Article 3's prohibition against
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
10
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
7-12
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
inhumane or degrading treatment serves as a critical
safeguard against coercive interrogation techniques.
These provisions collectively create a legal obligation
for member states to ensure that interrogations are
conducted in a manner that respects human dignity
and fundamental rights.
The case studies analyzed, including Selmouni v. France
and Istanbul v. Turkey, illustrate how the European
Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has interpreted and
enforced these principles in practical terms. In
Selmouni, the Court's ruling highlighted the necessity
of safeguarding detainees from torture and ill-
treatment,
reinforcing
the
principle
that
interrogational practices must comply with the highest
human rights standards. Similarly, Istanbul showcased
the ECtHR’s willingness to scrutinize state practices
and ensure accountability, thereby sending a strong
message to member states regarding their obligations
under the Convention. The outcomes of these cases
not only advanced legal precedents but also prompted
reforms in national legal systems to align interrogation
practices with ECHR standards.
The expert interviews conducted with legal scholars
and practitioners revealed a consensus on the
importance of the ECHR in promoting interrogational
fairness; however, they also highlighted several
challenges. Many interviewees pointed out that while
the legal framework is robust, its implementation is
often inconsistent, particularly in the context of
national security concerns. The pressure to respond to
security threats can lead to practices that undermine
the very rights the ECHR seeks to protect.
Furthermore, participants noted that disparities in the
application of ECHR standards across different
jurisdictions can create gaps in protection, suggesting
that additional training and resources are necessary for
law enforcement agencies to fully understand and
implement the principles of interrogational fairness.
The findings of this study affirm that the ECHR plays a
vital role in safeguarding interrogational fairness
within Europe. However, the effectiveness of this
protection is contingent upon the commitment of
member states to uphold and enforce these rights
consistently. The study advocates for ongoing reforms
to address implementation challenges and reinforce
the necessity of balancing security measures with
human rights protections. By enhancing awareness
and training among law enforcement personnel and
promoting judicial accountability, member states can
ensure that the principles enshrined in the ECHR
translate into meaningful safeguards for individuals
during interrogation.
DISCUSSION
The findings from this study underscore the critical role
of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
in shaping interrogational fairness across its member
states. The legal provisions enshrined within the ECHR,
particularly Articles 6 and 3, establish a comprehensive
framework that prioritizes the protection of individual
rights during interrogation processes. However, the
study reveals that while the ECHR provides a solid
foundation for safeguarding these rights, several
challenges persist in the practical application of its
principles.
One key issue identified is the tension between
national security concerns and the need to uphold
human rights. As states grapple with the complexities
of terrorism and organized crime, there is a tendency
to prioritize security measures that may inadvertently
compromise interrogational fairness. This dynamic is
evident in the expert interviews, where practitioners
noted that law enforcement agencies sometimes
resort to coercive interrogation techniques under the
guise of ensuring public safety. Such practices not only
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
11
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
7-12
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
contravene the ECHR's principles but also risk eroding
public trust in the justice system.
Moreover, the case studies analyzed illustrate the
ECtHR's role as a guardian of human rights,
demonstrating its willingness to hold member states
accountable for violations. However, the effectiveness
of the Court's rulings hinges on the willingness of
national governments to implement necessary
reforms. The disparities observed in the application of
ECHR standards across different jurisdictions suggest a
lack of uniformity in how interrogational fairness is
upheld. Some states have made significant strides in
aligning their practices with ECHR mandates, while
others lag behind, reflecting a broader trend of
inconsistency in human rights protection within
Europe.
Furthermore, the study highlights the need for
enhanced training and resources for law enforcement
personnel to better understand the implications of the
ECHR on their practices. By fostering a culture of
respect for human rights within police forces, states
can mitigate the risks of coercive interrogation and
reinforce the principles of fairness and dignity. This
approach not only aligns with the ECHR's objectives
but also contributes to building a more just and
equitable legal framework.
While the ECHR serves as a crucial instrument for
safeguarding interrogational fairness, its effectiveness
is contingent upon the commitment of member states
to uphold these rights consistently. The ongoing
dialogue surrounding human rights and national
security will be vital in shaping the future of
interrogational practices in Europe. As this study
demonstrates, a robust legal framework, coupled with
a proactive approach to implementation and training,
is essential to ensure that the rights of individuals are
protected
during
interrogation,
ultimately
strengthening the rule of law and the credibility of the
justice system.
CONCLUSION
The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
plays a pivotal role in safeguarding interrogational
fairness, establishing critical legal frameworks that
protect individuals during interrogation processes. This
study has highlighted the essential provisions within
the ECHR, particularly Articles 6 and 3, which
collectively mandate that interrogations be conducted
with respect for human dignity and fundamental
rights. Through a comprehensive analysis of landmark
cases and expert interviews, it has become evident
that while the ECHR provides a robust foundation for
protecting
interrogational
fairness,
significant
challenges remain in its practical application.
The tension between national security imperatives and
the preservation of individual rights presents a
formidable obstacle to achieving consistent adherence
to ECHR standards. The findings indicate that coercive
interrogation practices, often justified in the name of
security, undermine the core principles of justice and
fairness that the ECHR seeks to uphold. Moreover,
disparities in the application of these standards across
member states further complicate the landscape of
human rights protection, leading to a fragmented
approach that can leave individuals vulnerable during
interrogations.
To enhance the effectiveness of the ECHR in
safeguarding interrogational fairness, it is crucial for
member states to prioritize the implementation of its
principles within their legal systems. This requires a
concerted effort to provide adequate training for law
enforcement
personnel,
ensuring
they
fully
understand and respect the rights enshrined in the
ECHR.
Additionally,
fostering
a
culture
of
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
12
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
7-12
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
accountability within police forces is essential to
mitigate the risks of human rights violations during
interrogations.
Ultimately, this study underscores the importance of
an ongoing commitment to human rights as an integral
component of democratic governance. As societies
navigate the complexities of modern security
challenges, the need for a balanced approach that
reconciles the demands of safety with the imperative
of protecting individual rights has never been more
critical. By reinforcing the ECHR's provisions and
ensuring their consistent application, Europe can move
closer to a future where interrogational fairness is not
just a legal obligation but a fundamental societal value.
REFERENCE
1.
A Peculiar privilege in historical perspective
2.
Self-incrimination in European human rights law-a
pregnant pragmatism?
3.
Europeanizing self-incrimination: the right to
remain silent in the European court of human
rights
4.
Conflicting human rights: an exploration in the
context of the right to a fair trial in the European
convention for the protection of human rights and
fundamental freedoms
5.
Assisting and advising defendants before trial
6.
Evidentiary barriers to conviction and two models
of criminal procedure: a comparative study
7.
Politics, research and symbolism in criminal justice:
the right of silence and the police and criminal
evidence act 1984
8.
The fall and rise of torture: a comparative and
historical analysis
9.
The legal profession in the 1990s
—
images of
change
10.
The variable subject of the EU constitution, civil
Liberties and human rights
11.
Recent cases on pre-trial detention and delay in
criminal proceedings in the European court of
human rights
12.
The role of the criminal defence lawyer in an
inquisitorial procedure: legal and ethical constrains
13.
Re-conceptualizing the right of silence as an
effective fair trail standard
