Darko Dimovski, Petar Pešić

DOI Number
First page
Last page


This paper focuses on the review of standards established by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) with regards to the use of evidence obtained in breach of the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), ultimately resulting in a violation of the right to a fair trial. Due consideration has been given to the use of evidence obtained in violation of Article 3, Article 8 and the privilege against self-incrimination. Even though the specific rules on admissibility of evidence were to be regulated by each of the Contracting States, the Court set out standards on the use of evidence in order to address the primary question: Does the use of evidence obtained in breach of the Convention rights render the proceedings as a whole to be unfair? The authors analyze the Court jurisprudence on this matter and the evolution of these standards over time in order to respond to this question.


right to a fair trial, use of evidence, breach of ECHR, torture evidence, privilege against self-incrimination

Full Text:



Berger M., (2006), Europeanizing Self-Incrimination: The Right to Remain Silent in the European Court of Human Rights, Columbia Journal of European Law, Vol. 12, 2006, p.340;

Fura E., Klamberg M., (2012), The Chilling Effect of Counter-Terrorism Measures: A Comparative Analysis of Electronic Surveillance Laws in Europe and the USA, In: Casadevall J., Myjer E., O’Boyle M.(ed), Freedom of Expression: Essays in honour of Nicolas Bratza – President of the European Court of Human Rights, Oisterwijk, 2012, pp. 463-481

Hodgon J., (2011), Safeguarding Suspects’ Rights in Europe: A Comparative Perspective, In: New Criminal Law Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2011

Hoyano C. H. L., (2001) Striking the balance between the rights of defendants and vulnerable witnesses: Will special measures directions contravene the right to a fair trial?, Criminal Law Review-London, 2001, pp. 948-969

Jackson M., (2016), Freeing Soering: The ECHR, State Complicity in Torture, and Jurisdiction, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2016, pp 1-17

Kerr, Orin S., (2005), Searches and Seizures in a Digital World, Harvard Law Review, Vol. 119, No. 2, 2005, p. 531

The European Convention on Human Rights (adopted 4 November 1950, entered into force 3 September 1953) (ECHR)

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171 (ICCPR)

HUDOC database -

List of cases

Schenk v. Switzerland, Ap. no.10862/84

Soering v. The United Kingdom, Ap. 14038/88

Brusco v. France, Ap. 1466/07

John Murray v. The United Kingdom, Ap. 18371/91

X and others v. Austria, Ap. 19010/07

Saunders v. The United Kingdom [GC], Ap. 19187/91

Gäfgen v. Germany, Ap. 22978/05

Selmouni v. France [GC], Ap. 25803/94

Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. The United Kingdom [GC], Ap. 26766/05 and Ap. 22228/06

Magee v. The United Kingdom, Ap. 28135/95

Heaney and McGuinness v. Ireland, Ap. 34720/97

Khan v. The United Kingdom, Ap. 35394/97

Weh v. Austria Case, Ap. 38544/97

Edwards and Lewis v. The United Kingdom [GC], Ap. 39647/98 and Ap. 40461/98

Bykov v. Russia [GC], Ap. 4378/08

Sebalj v. Croatia, Case Ap. 4429/09

P.G. and J.H. v. The United Kingdom, Ap. 44787/98

Örs and Others v. Turkey, Ap. 46213/99

Söylemez v. Turkey, Case Ap. 46661/99

Allan v. The United Kingdom, Ap. 48539/99

Jalloh v. Germany, Case Ap. 54810/00

İçöz v. Turkey (dec.), Ap. 54919/00

Heglas v. The Czech Republic, Ap. 5935/02

El Haski v. Belgium, Ap. 649/08

Ramanauskas v. Lithuania, Ap. 74420/01

Orkem SA, formerly CDF Chimie SA v. Commission of the European Communities, 1989 E.C.R. 3289, § 111

Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)



  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 1450-5517 (Print)
ISSN 2406-1786 (Online)