The presumption of innocence under siege: Procedural safeguards and systemic risks in contemporary european criminal law
The presumption of innocence under siege: Procedural safeguards and systemic risks in contemporary european criminal law

Summary/Abstract: In recent decades, the presumption of innocence—a foundational principle of criminal justice—has faced increasing challenges across European jurisdictions. This paper investigates the tension between traditional procedural safeguards and the systemic risks generated by contemporary trends such as media sensationalism, pre-trial publicity, preventive justice mechanisms, and the expansion of surveillance technologies. The central objective is to assess how these evolving practices threaten the normative and practical integrity of the presumption of innocence within both national legal systems and the broader European framework, particularly under the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union.The paper puts forward the hypothesis that the erosion of procedural safeguards, coupled with systemic pressures such as public demand for security and efficiency in criminal proceedings, undermines the effective protection of the presumption of innocence. Methodologically, the study relies on comparative legal analysis and doctrinal examination of landmark cases and legislative reforms across EU Member States. The results reveal a concerning trend of normative dilution, where formal guarantees persist in legal texts but are often disregarded or reinterpreted in practice. Key findings emphasize the need for a reinforced legal culture that resists populist narratives and reaffirms procedural justice as an indispensable component of democratic legitimacy. The article concludes by proposing a recalibration of European criminal law to restore balance between effective prosecution and fundamental rights protection.

• Details
• Contents