Academic Scientific Journals“Fair” and “Inclusive”: The Standard of Criminal Proceedings Involving Suspects and Defendants with Special Needs
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26881/gsp.2025.4.13Keywords:
fairness, vulnerability, defendant, criminal justice, needsAbstract
It is increasingly clear to those working in the criminal justice system, as well as to those responsible for formulating policy, that there is a need to provide additional support to individuals involved in the criminal justice process. This is because, as a result of their particular characteristics or the circumstances of their case, particular individuals may require special assistance in order to be able to exercise their procedural rights fully and to participate effectively in the proceedings. The aim of this article is to identify the standards of treatment for suspects and accused persons who have been identified by European and international bodies or self-defined as having special needs. Through the analysis of specific cases, the text attempts to answer the question of whether the current jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights is an appropriate guideline for national authorities, including lawmakers and law enforcement personnel, on how to ensure the rights of persons with special needs and on whether they require additional attention from those conducting the proceedings.
Downloads
References
Adamska-Gallant A., Vulnerable Witnesses in Practice of International Courts – Definition and Trauma as the Key Risk Factor, “Peace Human Rights Governance” 2024, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 53–74.
Arnardóttir O.M., Vulnerability under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights Innovation or Business as Usual?, “Oslo Law Review” 2017, vol. 4, issue 3, pp. 150–171.
Celiksoy E., Ibrahim and Others v. UK: Watering down the Salduz principles?, “New Journal of European Criminal Law” 2019, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 229–246.
Dehaghani R., Not vulnerable enough? A missed opportunity to bolster the vulnerable accused’s position in Hasáliková v. Slovakia, https://strasbourgobservers.com/2021/11/23/not-vulnerable-enough-a-missed-opportunity-to-bolster-the-vulnerable-accuseds-position-in-hasalikova-v-slovakia
[accessed: 2024.08.8].
Domańska M., People with Disabilities as a Vulnerable Group. The Concept of Protection of the Rights of Vulnerable Groups, “Białostockie Studia Prawnicze” 2018, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 25–34.
Fineman M.A., The vulnerable subject: Anchoring equality in the human condition, “Yale Journal of Law & Feminism” 2008, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–23.
Gerry F., Cooper P., Effective Participation of Vulnerable Accused Persons: Case Management, Court Adaptation and Rethinking Criminal Responsibility, “Journal of Judicial Administration” 2017, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 265–275.
Girdwoyń K., Right to appropriate representation of defendants with intellectual disabilities in criminal proceedings, “Ius Novum” 2020, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 67–86.
Goss R., The Disappearing ‘Minimum Rights’ of Article 6 ECHR: The Unfortunate Legacy of Ibrahim and Beuze, “Human Rights Law Review” 2023, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1–23.
Grans L., The Impact of Vulnerability on State Obligations in Criminal Proceedings on Domestic Violence: Interpreting the Istanbul Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights, “Women & Criminal Justice” 2023 [published online], pp. 1–16.
Jasiński W., Dostęp osoby oskarżonej o popełnienie czynu zagrożonego karą do adwokata na wstępnym etapie ścigania karnego: standard strasburski, “Europejski Przegląd Sądowy” 2019, no. 1, pp. 24–30.
Mergaerts L., European guarantees for vulnerable suspects and defendants: Good intentions but limited impact in national procedures, 2020.
Nowakowska J., Wczesna identyfikacja osób wymagających szczególnego traktowania, będących uczestnikami postępowania karnego [in:] Osoby z niepełnosprawnością intelektualną. Z uwzględnieniem wyników badań przeprowadzonych przez pracowników Biura Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich, eds. E. Dawidziuk, M. Mazur, Warszawa 2017, pp. 149–167.
Peroni L., Timmer A., Vulnerable Groups: The Promise of an Emergent Concept in European Human Rights Convention Law, “International Journal of Constitutional Law” 2013, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1056–1085.
Sakowicz A., Suspect’s access to a lawyer at an early stage of criminal proceedings in view the caselaw of the European Court of Human Rights, “Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal” 2021, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1979–2014.
Sakowicz A., Zakaz dowodowego wykorzystania wyjaśnień podejrzanego występującego bez obrońcy bądź pod nieobecność obrońcy, “Europejski Przegląd Sądowy” 2019, no. 1, pp. 47–53.
Truscan I., Considerations of vulnerability: From principles to action in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, “Retfærd (Nordic Journal for Law and Justice)” 2013, vol. 36, no. 3/142, pp. 64–83.
Turner B.S., Vulnerability and Human Rights, University Park 2006.
Vaughan M., Milne R., Cherryman J., Dalton G., Managing investigative interviews with vulnerable suspects in the UK: Do specialist interview managers (IM’s) understand vulnerability? Psychology, “Crime & Law” 2024, pp. 1–20.
Wąsek-Wiaderek M., Model zakazów dowodowych z perspektywy Konwencji i orzecznictwa ETPCz [in:] Nowe spojrzenie na model zakazów dowodowych w procesie karnym, eds. J. Skorupka, A. Drozd, Warszawa 2015, pp. 20–41.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Gdańsk Legal Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
