StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

The Right to Silence - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
One issue associated with the exercise of the right to remain silent, concerns protection from unfavourable inference by the court. This is a significant issue, as courts, frequently, treat silence as guilt on part of the accused…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER91.9% of users find it useful
The Right to Silence
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "The Right to Silence"

? of the of the of the The Right to Silence The right to silence enables a suspect to remain silent during interrogation by the police. It has been justified as protection from self – incrimination. Thus, remaining silent during the pre-trial stage, constitutes a special privilege, whereby an accused, who believes on reasonable grounds that he is suspected of having committed a crime, can remain silent, during the trial. Such a person can refuse to supply information to the interrogating authority, with regard to the occurrence of the offence (Hocking and Manville 63). Moreover, he can refuse to divulge information about the identity of the participants in the crime. A second issue associated with the exercise of the right to remain silent, concerns protection from unfavourable inference by the court. This is a significant issue, as courts, frequently, treat silence as guilt on part of the accused. Silence tends to generate doubts against the defence made by the accused, during the trial (Hocking and Manville 63). In England, the right to remain silence, during interrogation by the police, was developed in 1829. This right came into force with the establishment of the professional police force. Prior to the development of this principle, there were complaints that confession were illegally obtained by the police. Under this right, a suspect can refuse to answer the questions posed by the police or courts. The 1912 guidelines, relating to the interrogation of suspects by the police, gave effect to this right. Furthermore, this instrument incorporated a right to silence in the Judges’ Rules (Skinnider and Gordon). The right to remain silent is inherent in the legal system of the majority of the countries. The accused can exercise this right during pre-trial interviews and interrogations, conducted by the police. Another right, in the criminal justice system is the privilege against self-incrimination. The right to remain silent and protection against self-incrimination have connoted different things at different times (Skinnider and Gordon). In England, the privilege against self-incrimination was initially available, only to individuals under oath. All the same, those under oath were prevented from giving evidence, and this enabled the prosecution to subject the accused to incriminating questioning (Skinnider and Gordon). In Ibrahim v R, the court held that the confession of the accused could be accepted only if such confession had been voluntarily provided, by the accused. The prosecution was required to establish that the accused had voluntarily confessed his guilt (Ibrahim v R). The right to remain silent has long been deemed to be a fundamental right of an accused person. However, the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 has significantly reduced the effectiveness of this right. This Act empowers the courts to draw conclusions from the silence of an accused person, under the following circumstances (Curtailment of the right to silence). First, if the accused fails to mention a fact, during the trial, even though that fact directly relates to his defence, the court may arrive at its own conclusions regarding the accused. Second, if the accused fails to mention a fact, on being charged with some offence, which should have been reasonably mentioned by the accused (Curtailment of the right to silence). Third, if the accused fails to acknowledge the objects, substances, or marks on his body, clothing or personal effects found at the place where the accused was arrested. Fourth, if the accused fails to account for his presence at the place where the offence was committed, at the time that the offence had been committed (Curtailment of the right to silence). The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 has come into force, from April 1995. This Act places a number of restrictions on the exercise of the right to silence by suspects, during trial and police interrogation. If the accused chooses to abstain from mentioning facts during questioning, which are subsequently relied upon in the trial, may be rendered the subject of prosecution comment. In addition, such failure to disclose facts permits the court to arrive at its own inferences (Bucke, Street and Brown). Thus, the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 enables the courts to draw appropriate conclusions, with regard to the charges against the accused if the latter remains silent. Despite the fact that this Act has restricted the application of the right of silence, it has not abolished this right completely. All the same, the accused can exercise the right to remain silent, during police interrogation. In addition, the accused can choose to refrain from testifying in court. However, if the accused maintains silence, then the court proceedings could prove prejudicial (Bucke, Street and Brown). The right to silence permits the accused to provide evidence or to abstain, during a criminal trial. Moreover, there is no general duty to assist the police, in their enquiries. It is the responsibility of the prosecution to establish the allegations made against the accused. Furthermore, the prosecution cannot attempt to establish the defendant’s guilt, on the basis of his silence during interrogation (Right to silence). This principle of right to silence has been considerably watered down, in the recent past. Consequently, a defendant who fails to provide an explanation, at the time of his interrogation by the police, may have to envisage a situation, where the jury or judge may draw an adverse inference from such silence (Right to silence). As such, there has been a gradual transformation of the law of England and Wales. At present, the accused’s silence can be treated as guilt. Although, the accused need not provide information, the changes effected have made it obligatory for the accused to give evidence (Hocking and Manville 69). The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 requires the accused to mention the facts relating to the charge framed against him, if the accused intends to rely on these facts, in his defence (Hocking and Manville 70). These developments, which make it difficult for the accused to exercise his right to silence and not to be incriminated, have not been upheld at the European level. For instance, in Funke v France, the European Court of Human Rights held that under the provisions of Article 6(1) of the Human Rights Convention, the plaintiff had a right to a fair trial. This right had been compromised by a requirement to disclose his tax documents, which could prove to be tantamount to self-incrimination (Funke v France). Moreover, in Kansal v UK, the Official Receiver had compelled the accused to make certain statements. The use of these statements at a subsequent trial was in breach of the fair trial requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights (Kansal v UK). The right to silence is a privilege against self incrimination. It is aimed at protecting the citizens against the excesses committed by investigating agencies. It is also aimed at safeguarding the accused from the abuse of power in judicial interrogation. Any system of justice regards an accused person to be innocent till such time as his guilt is established by the prosecution, beyond all reasonable doubt. If the right to silence is rescinded or if the court is permitted to draw conclusions from the silence of the accused, this does not eradicate the possibility that criminals will escape from their crimes. Such risk can be eliminated to a major extent, only by conducting a thorough investigation into the crime and collecting incontrovertible proof of the guilt of the accused. However, the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, enables the court to draw inferences from the silence of the accused. After the enactment of this Act, the privilege of Right to Silence has proved to be harmful to the defence of the accused, in court proceedings. A fair balance should be maintained between the defence of the accused and the investigations made by the authorities. It is only a systematic and meticulous investigation of the crime that can render justice to all. Works Cited Bucke, Tom, Robert Street and David Brown. The right of silence: the impact of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Home Office Research Study 199. London: Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, 2000. "Criminal Justice and Public Order Act ." Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1994. Curtailment of the right to silence. 18 August 2008. 3 January 2011 . "European Convention on Human Rights." The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Rome: Secretary General of the Council of Europe, 3 September 1953. Funke v France. No. 16 EHRR 297. 1993. Hocking, Barbara Ann and Laura Leigh Manville. "What of the right to silence: still supporting the presumptions of innocence, or a growing legal fiction?" Macquarie Law Journal 1.1(2001): 63 – 92. Ibrahim v R. No. AC 599. 1914. Kansal v UK. No. 39 EHRR 31. 2004. Right to silence. n.d. 3 January 2011 . Skinnider, Eileen and Frances Gordon. "The Right to Silence - International Norms and Domestic Realities." Vancouver, B.C. Canada: The International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, October 2001. Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“The Right to Silence Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/environmental-studies/1404644-the-right-to-silence
(The Right to Silence Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 Words)
https://studentshare.org/environmental-studies/1404644-the-right-to-silence.
“The Right to Silence Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/environmental-studies/1404644-the-right-to-silence.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF The Right to Silence

Law of Evidence: The Right to Silence

It was ruled in R v Condron that directions to the jury must be given with caution emphasizing The Right to Silence.... The author states that in R v Gilbert in 1977 the Court of Appeal in emphasizing the importance of the right to remain silent ruled that a direction to a jury indicating that an inference of guilt can be drawn from the defendant's exercise of that right was erroneous.... According to the ruling in R v Ali, the only recourse a defendant may have is to either deny culpability at the police station or to prepare a statement setting out his or her defence so as to preserve the right to raise the defence at trial....
5 Pages (1250 words) Case Study

Law Evidence, Ian Dennis Argument and the English Law

There i s considerable favoritism that the courts have a right to every piece of evidence that could likewise tip the scales in favor.... Improperly obtained evidence- The English Law in its fairness decides it is rational to exclude improperly obtained evidence so England's policy was to include the evidence regardless of the source or how it was obtained....
13 Pages (3250 words) Case Study

Law of Criminal Evidence Case Study

This includes any informal chat with police officers and contradictory to popular belief, right to silence has not been abolished.... right to remain silent come under Miranda Warnings in US.... In recent years it has been endangered so that a magistrate can draw adverse inference from the silence.... As it stands, while accused is entitled to remain silent, he is also cautioned that during trial adverse inference could be drawn from such a silence, as being silent due to guilt, or planning to fabricate fiction....
4 Pages (1000 words) Case Study

Law of Evidence: Analysis of Billy's Case

4 could not be appealed despite the fact that the judge had wrongly summed up to the jury that the defendant was under no obligation to answer any questions and that he had a right to silence, and the fact that he appeared to have been indicating to the jury that silence in interview should allow the jury to draw adverse inferences from the silence.... This question requires a discussion of the 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 which essentially provides that the court in its determination of whether, the defendant is guilty of the offence charged, whether there is case to answer or whether the defendant should be committed to the Crown Court, may draw such inferences as appear proper from evidence of silence in certain circumstances....
7 Pages (1750 words) Case Study

Introduction to criminal justice system

In a criminal trial, one of the most important rights that will accrue to any person accused of a crime is the constitutional right to every aspect of the due process of law that will ensure that his or her guilt is established by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.... The due process of law is the right accorded to every person alleged to have committed a crime to be treated fairly when involved in a legal action....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Mark and his Attacking Janet

The Right to Silence is given to Mark, through this law.... The Right to Silence indicates that the accused does not have to answer questions during trial and hearing or before it in order to avoid self-incrimination.... The Right to Silence is given to Mark, through this law.... The Right to Silence indicates that the accused does not have to answer questions during trial and hearing or before it in order to avoid self incrimination....
2 Pages (500 words) Essay

Going Deep into the Issue of Criminal Advocacy

This paper 'Going Deep into the Issue of Criminal Advocacy" focuses on the fact that one of the rights that will accrue to any person accused of a crime is the right to every aspect of the due process of law that will ensure that the guilt is established by “proof beyond a reasonable doubt....
9 Pages (2250 words) Assignment

Law of Evidence: The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

The author analyzes Billy's case according to the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 and states that all in all the chances of Billy being able to get a right to appeal are narrow and based on the genuineness of his epileptic state and the reliance on his solicitor's advice.... hellip; Billy is advised that based on the Hoare and Pierce/Beckles interpretative issue basing his appeal on his silence because of Legal advice will depend to a large extent on his mental state at the time of the questioning and also the extent of his genuineness in heading to the advice of his solicitor....
7 Pages (1750 words) Case Study
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us