CERTAIN ASPECTS OF DEFINING THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: AN ANALYSIS OF ECHR CASE LAW

Abstract

The article examines the content of the principle of proportionality in criminal proceedings through the prism of the ECHR case law. This principle is analyzed through the following articles of the European Convention on Human Rights: Article 2 (right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of torture), Article 5(1) (right to liberty and security of person), Article 6(1) (right to a fair trial), Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), etc. The studied ECHR decisions made it possible to conclude that the principle of proportionality is multidimensional and has been interpreted in various ways in the field of criminal procedure law: in relation to restrictions on personal freedom of citizens, the use of coercive measures, restrictions on the right to privacy and secrecy of communication, etc. The author concludes that the following formula can be called common among the interpretations of various articles of the Convention: whether the means used were proportionate to the purpose sought to be achieved by these measures. If the answer is “yes”, then we can say that there was no violation of the right guaranteed by the Convention. If the answer is “no”, then it is likely that such a violation will be found in this case. Given the large number of ECHR judgments and examples from national law enforcement practice, the article only partially reflects the content of the principle of proportionality through the interpretation of ECHR articles and its definition requires further research. Given the limited scope of the study, further elucidation of the content of this principle will be carried out in the following scientific developments.