case

Out of Many, One? Strasbourg's Ibrahim Decision on Article 6

Ryan Goss

Abstract

This case comment considers the European Court of Human Rights decision of Ibrahim v United Kingdom on 13 September 2016. Relying on Salduz v Turkey, the applicants claimed, largely unsuccessfully, that denial of access to a lawyer during police questioning, and subsequent admission into evidence of statements made in the course of that questioning, violated fair trial rights protected by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The comment suggests that the decision’s unusually emphatic statements about Article 6’s ‘internal structure’ have consequences for assessing violations in future applications. Further, the decision creates greater room for public interest balancing in Article 6 cases. The decision may thus undermine the Article 6 guarantees.

CONTINUE READING FULL ARTICLE
Published November 2017
Frequency Bi-Monthly
Volume 80
Issue 6
Print ISSN 0026-7961
Online ISSN 1468-2230