NCJ Number
174887
Journal
Journal of Financial Crime Volume: 5 Issue: 2 Dated: October 1997 Pages: 182-189
Date Published
1997
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This paper considers the implications of the European Court of Human Rights' decision in Saunders v. United Kingdom (1996), which pertains to the scope of the ban on self-incrimination.
Abstract
In the "Saunders" judgement, the Court found it necessary to examine whether Saunders had been subject to a compulsion to give evidence, indicating that there would be no violation if the statements were given voluntarily, even if the accused should prefer not to give evidence at the trial. The judgment restricts the power of prosecutors to use statements made by the accused, under criminal liability, at the administrative stage as evidence during the main hearing in the subsequent criminal case. The statements at issue in the Saunders case were taken as written notes from the inspectors' interviews with Saunders. Under the court's ruling, these statements could be neither submitted nor read during the presentation of the case before the adjudicating court, because they constituted a major portion of the evidence against Saunders. If the human rights bodies extend the scope of the ban on self-incrimination any further, alternative modes of determining facts and collecting evidence will be required. In the case of suspected misconduct being weighed in the context of an administrative forum, when there is suspected criminal behavior the police should be brought in at an earlier stage. The investigation will probably be more effective, but the relationship between state and citizen will be polarized and aggravated. 15 references