International standards for the application of the presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings

Abstract

The presumption of innocence is an internationally recognized standard of criminal justice. However, law enforcement practice shows a lack of legal certainty regarding the understanding and implementation of certain provisions of this principle of criminal proceedings. The purpose of the publication is to identify and systematize the internationally recognized standards of guaranteeing the right to the presumption of innocence. The study used such methods of cognition as comparison, analysis, generalization, and a systematic approach, which made it possible to describe the results and substantiate the conclusions drawn. It is determined that, according to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the purpose of the presumption of innocence is to: ensure a fair trial by preventing accusatory judicial bias; prevent the formation of premature public opinion regarding the guilt/innocence of the accused, which may adversely affect the impartiality of the court; and protect persons who have been acquitted or whose proceedings have been closed on rehabilitative grounds. Ensuring the presumption of innocence requires ensuring that this right is real, not imaginary. It is established that when determining whether the principle of presumption was violated by public officials when informing the public about the progress of criminal proceedings, the European Court of Human Rights takes into account whether the officials' statement prompted the public to believe in the guilt of the person before the court passed a verdict and whether these statements could have influenced the assessment of the facts when making a court decision. When assessing statements made by public officials, it is necessary to distinguish between a statement of suspicion of committing a criminal offence and a statement that a person has committed a criminal offence in the absence of a conviction; to consider the context in which the statement was made and to take into account the actual content of the statements. The author substantiates the rules of the presumption of innocence in time: it is valid until the court verdict enters into force; a guilty verdict does not cancel a person's right to the presumption of innocence until it enters into force; the adoption of an acquittal or the closure of criminal proceedings on rehabilitative grounds requires that a person be found innocent and treated accordingly. The study will ensure unified law enforcement practice of pre-trial investigation bodies, prosecutors, and courts in respect of compliance with the rules of the presumption of innocence, which will contribute to the rule of law