Responses to Salduz

Procedural Tradition, Change and the Need for Effective Defence

Bibliographic Data

ID9195170
AuthorsJohn D Jackson (0000-0002-8461-3853, Department of Justice, corresponding author)
Year2016
Volume79
Issue6
Pages987-1018
Publication date2016-11-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueModern Law Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0026-7961 • E-ISSN: 1468-2230
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/1468-2230.12227
OpenAlexW2555926531
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited1

This article examines the responses of national courts to the ECtHR's decision in Salduz v Turkey that suspects be provided with access to a lawyer before they are first interrogated by the police. It argues that harmonious application of human rights standards in criminal proceedings should build upon common values underpinning the procedural traditions of member states. ECtHR success in gaining acceptance for the principle of access to a lawyer during police interrogation, anchoring it in the privilege against incrimination, is contrasted with resistance towards giving the defence any active role during criminal investigations. It is argued that this resistance can be overcome by an appeal to safeguards that have long dominated the trial process. As the investigation phase increasingly determines the outcome of criminal proceedings, standards of fairness traditionally reserved for the trial process should be applied also to this phase in order to provide suspects with an effective defence

Appeal · Business · Criminal procedure · Criminology · Human rights · Interrogation · Order (exchange) · Political science · Privilege (computing) · Process (computing) · Resistance (ecology) · Underpinning · Computer Science · Engineering · Human Rights and Development · International Law and Human Rights · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access