Admissibility of Confession Evidence Across Borders: A Transnational Perspective

  • Fenella M. W. Billing


The previous chapters have demonstrated that the question of balancing the effectiveness of law enforcement and the interests of the suspect or accused in relation to the right to silence and the right against self-incrimination relies on in-built continuity that exists between the investigative and the trial phases within the national law. This ensures that any limitations that are placed on the right to silence in the investigative phase are meaningfully counter-balanced at some later point, which may not be until the criminal trial takes place. The opposite is also true, whereby what may be perceived as restrictions on the right to silence in the trial, such as allowing an inference of guilt to be drawn from the accused’s pre-trial silence, may have been safeguarded by the circumstances in which the suspect’s evidence was obtained, for example, by the protection provided by cautioning about the right to silence, legal representation, a letter of rights, early involvement of the prosecuting authorities etc. Building on this conceptual framework, this chapter examines what happens to the balance at a fundamental level when confession evidence or evidence of silence is transferred across national borders where the equivalent counter-balancing measures are not present.


  1. Elholm T (2009) Does EU criminal law cooperation necessarily mean increased repression? Eur J Crime Crim Law Crim Justice 17:191–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. European Criminal Policy Initiative (2013) A manifesto on European criminal procedure law. Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik 11:430–446Google Scholar
  3. Kaiafa-Gbandi M (2010) Harmonisation of criminal procedures on the basis of common principles. The EU’s challenge for rule-of-law transnational crime control. In: Fijnaut C, Ouwerkerk J (eds) The future of police and judicial cooperation in the European Union. Martinus Nijhoff, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  4. Ligeti K (2013) Introduction. In: Ligeti (ed) Towards a Prosecutor for the European Union, vol 1: A comparative analysis. Hart, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 International License (, which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fenella M. W. Billing
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of LawAarhus UniversityAarhusDenmark

Personalised recommendations