
|
Allan v.
United-Kingdom, (48539/99) [2002] ECHR 697 (5
November 2002)
The text of
this case can be found on the European Court of Human Rights'
HUDOC database, available
here.
Facts: In the police interviews which followed his arrestfor murder,
the applicant availed himself of his right to remain silent. Duringhis
detention, a police informant was placed in his cell for the purpose
ofeliciting information from him. The informer declared, in his
witnessstatement, that the applicant admitted his presence at the murder
scene. Thisasserted admission was not part of the recorded interview and was
disputed. Theapplicant was convicted of murder and sentenced to life
imprisonment. Heappealed unsuccessfully.
Complaint: The applicant complained of the use of covert audio and
video surveillancewithin his cell, the prison visiting area and upon a
fellow prisoner and of theuse of materials gained by these means at his
trial. He relied on Articles 6(right to a fair trial), 8 (right to respect
for private life) and 13 (right toan effective remedy).
Holding: The ECHR declared that the use of evidence illicitly
obtained by the policewhile a suspect availed of his right to silence during
police interviewconstitutes a violation of Article 6 of the European
Convention.
Reasoning: The Court considered that the applicant would have been
subject topsychological pressures which impinged on the "voluntariness" of
thedisclosures. The information gained by the use of the informer have
beenobtained in defiance of the will of the applicant and its use at trial
impingedon the applicant's right to silence and privilege against
self-incrimination. Theserights protect against improper compulsion by the
authorities and the obtainingof evidence through methods of coercion or
oppression in defiance of the willof the accused. The Court also stated that
the scope of this right is notlimited to cases where duress has been used
against the accused or where thewill of the accused has been directly
overborne in some way. It also underlinedthat the right to silence is part
of a fair procedure, and serves to protectthe liberty of a suspected
individual to choose whether he speaks or remainssilent during the police
questioning.
|