Ibrahim and Others v . UK : Watering down the Salduz principles?

Abstract

The European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR or ‘the Court’) has gradually developed considerable jurisprudence affirming the right to access a lawyer prior to or during police interrogation, with Salduz v. Turkey marking a turning point in setting out a strong position on this right (i.e. the Salduz principles). However, in Ibrahim and Others v. United Kingdom (Ibrahim), the ECtHR expressed that there was a need for further clarifications of the Salduz principles, indicating that there is a two-stage assessment regarding whether any restriction on early access is compatible with the fair trial rights ensured in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR or ‘the Convention’). This article discusses whether the decision in Ibrahim represents a retreat from the Salduz principles (and a less robust position on the ECHR) by the ECtHR.