Make a Submission
Vol. 36 (2016)
General Articles

The Nullum Crimen Sine Lege Principle in the European Convention of Human Rights: The Actual Scope of Guarantees

PDF
  • Aleksandra Rychlewska
Aleksandra Rychlewska
Jagiellonian University in Kraków

Published 2016-12-31

Keywords

  • ECHR,
  • ECtHR,
  • European Convention on Human Rights,
  • European Court of Human Rights,
  • nullum crimen sine lege

Copyright (c) 2021 ILS PAS

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

The Nullum Crimen Sine Lege Principle in the European Convention of Human Rights: The Actual Scope of Guarantees. (2016). Polish Yearbook of International Law, 36, 163-186. https://doi.org/10.7420/pyil2016h

Abstract

The principle of nullum crimen sine lege expresses an old idea that only the law can prescribe a particular act as punishable. It is commonly understood as a requirement of sufficient definiteness of an offence, in particular – of a statutory description of an offence before it has been committed (lex scripta, lex praevia), and of clarity and precision in criminal provisions so as to enable an individual to conform with them (lex certa), as well as their strict interpretation (lex stricta). Nowadays the principle is an internationally recognized human right to foreseeable criminalization, guaranteed by, inter alia, Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the European Court of Human Rights seems to formulate two slightly different requirements on its basis, namely that the application of criminal law must be foreseeable for an individual and coherent with the “essence of an offence”. One may question whether this can serve as an adequate “shield” from arbitrariness on the part of State authorities. Nevertheless, the core aim of such a flexible approach is not to promote legal security for potential perpetrators, but to achieve better protection of human rights in general.

PDF

References

  1. Ashworth A., Principles of Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2003.
  2. Balcerzak M., Zasada nullum crimen sine lege w kontekście ścigania zbrodni wojennych i zbrodni przeciwko ludzkości na tle orzecznictwa Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka [The principle of nullum crimen sine lege in the context of prosecution of war crimes and crimes conagainst humanity in the light of the European Court of Human Rights case-law] [in:] T. Jasudowicz, M. Balcerzak, J. Kapelańska-Pręgowska (eds.), Współczesne problemy praw człowieka i międzynarodowego prawa humanitarnego [Contemporary issues in human rights and international humanitarian law], TNOiK Dom Organizatora, Toruń 2009.
  3. Bernardi A., Nullum crimen, nulla peona sine lege between European law and national law [in:] M.C. Bassiouni, V. Militello, H. Satzger (eds.), European Cooperation in Penal Matters: Issues and Perspectives, Cedam, Padova 2008.
  4. Beulke W., Wessels J., Strafrecht. Allgemeiner Teil. Die Straftat und ihr Aufbau, Müller, Heidelberg 2012.
  5. Brems E., Human Rights: Minimum and Maximum Perspectives, „Human Rights Law Review” 2009, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 349-372.
  6. Clements L.J., European Human Rights. Taking a Case under the Convention, Sweet & Maxwell, London 1994.
  7. Dębski R., Pozaustawowe znamiona przestępstwa [Non-statutory element of an offence], Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź 1995.
  8. Dijk P. van, Hoof G.J.H. van, Theory and practice of the European Convention on Human Rights, Kluwer Law International, The Hague 1998.
  9. ECtHR, Achour v. France (App. No. 67335/01), Grand Chamber, 29 March 2006.
  10. ECtHR, Ashlarba v. Georgia (App. No. 45554/08), 15 July 2014.
  11. ECtHR, Başkaya and Okçuoğlu v. Turkey (App. Nos. 23536/94 & 24408/94), Grand Chamber, 8 July 1999.
  12. ECtHR, C.R. v. the United Kingdom (App. No. 20190/92), 22 November 1995.
  13. ECtHR, Coëme and Others v. Belgium (App. Nos. 32492/96, 32547/96, 32548/96, 33209/96 & 33210/96), Grand Chamber, 22 June 2000.
  14. ECtHR, Del Rio Prada v. Spain (App. No. 42750/09) Grand Chamber, 21 October 2013.
  15. ECtHR, Dragotoniu and Militaru-Pidhorni v. Romania (App. Nos. 77193/01 & 77196/01), 24 May 2007.
  16. ECtHR, Flinkkilä and Others v. Finland (App. No. 25576/04), 6 July 2010.
  17. ECtHR, Gardel v. France (App. No. 16428/05), 17 December 2009.
  18. ECtHR, Groppera Radio AG and Others v. Switzerland (App. No. 10890/84), 28 March 1990.
  19. ECtHR, Jorgic v. Germany (74613/01), 12 July 2007.
  20. ECtHR, K.-H.W. v. Germany (App. No. 37201/97), Grand Chamber, 2 March 2001.
  21. ECtHR, Kafkaris v. Cyprus, para. 140; ECtHR, Cantoni v. France (App. No. 17862/91), Grand Chamber, 15 November 1996.
  22. ECtHR, Kafkaris, v. Cyprus (App. No. 21906/04), Grand Chamber, 12 February 2008.
  23. ECtHR, Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v. Russia (App. Nos. 11082/06 & 13772/05), 25 July 2013.
  24. ECtHR, Kokkinakis v. Greece (App. No. 14307/88), Grand Chamber 25 May 1993.
  25. ECtHR, Kononov v. Latvia (App. No. 36376/04), 24 July 2008.
  26. ECtHR, Kononov v. Lithuania (App. No. 36376/04), Grand Chamber, 17 May 2010.
  27. ECtHR, Korbely v. Hungary (App. No. 9174/02), Grand Chamber, 19 September 2008.
  28. ECtHR, M. v. Germany (App. No. 19359/04), 17 December 2009.
  29. ECtHR, Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey (App. No. 22535/93), 28 March 2000.
  30. ECtHR, Ould Dah v. France (App. No. 13113/03), 17 March 2009.
  31. ECtHR, Pessino v. France (App. No. 40403/02), 10 October 2006.
  32. ECtHR, Radio France and others v. France (App. No. 53984/00), 30 March 2004.
  33. ECtHR, S.W. v. the United Kingdom (App. No. 20166/92), 22 November 1995.
  34. ECtHR, Scoppola v. Italy (no. 2) (App. No. 10249/03), Grand Chamber, 17 September 2009.
  35. ECtHR, Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany (App. Nos. 34044/96, 35532/97 & 44801/98), Grand Chamber, 22 March 2001.
  36. ECtHR, Sud Fondi Srl and Others v. Italy (App. No. 75909/01), 20 January 2009.
  37. ECtHR, The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (App. No. 6538/74), 26 April 1979.
  38. ECtHR, van Anraat v. the Netherlands (65389/09), 6 July 2010.
  39. ECtHR, Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania (App. No. 35343/05), Grand Chamber, 20 October 2015.
  40. Forowicz M., The Reception of International Law in the European Court of Human Rights, Oxford University Press, New York 2010.
  41. Gallant K.S., The Principle of Legality in International and Comparative Criminal Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2009.
  42. Gardocki L., Ponadustawowe i pozaustawowe standardy prawa karnego [Super-statutory and nonstatutory standards of criminal law], „Studia Iuridica” 2008, vol. 48.
  43. Glaser S., Nullum Crimen Sine Lege, „Journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law” 1942, vol. 24, no. 1.
  44. Harris D.J., O’Boyle M., Warbrick C., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, Butterworth, London 1995.
  45. Hofmański P., [in:] L. Garlicki (ed.), Konwencja o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności. Komentarz do artykułów 1–18. Tom I [Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Commentary on Articles 1-18. Volume I], Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck, Warszawa 2010.
  46. Holy K., Prawo międzynarodowe publiczne wobec amnestii [Public international law and amnesty], Difin, Warszawa 2015.
  47. Jacobs F.G., Ovey C., White R.C.A., The European Convention on Human Rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2010.
  48. Kamiński I.C., Zakaz karania bez podstawy prawnej – orzecznictwo ETPCz za lata 2008–2010 [No punishment without law - case law of the ECtHR of 2008-2010], „Europejski Przegląd Sądowy” 2011, no. 11.
  49. Królikowski M., Zawłocki R., Prawo karne [Criminal law], Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck, Warszawa 2015.
  50. Kunicka-Michalska B., Projekt Kodeksu karnego w świetle art. 7 Europejskiej Konwencji o Ochronie Praw i Podstawowych Wolności Człowieka [The project of the Polish Penal Code in the light of Article 7 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms] [in:] T. Bojarski, E. Skrętowicz (eds.), Problemy reformy prawa karnego [Problems of criminal law reform], Lubelskie Towarzystwo Naukowe, Lublin 1993.
  51. Merrills J.G., The development of international law by the European Court of Human Rights, Manchester University Press, Manchester 1988.
  52. Mowbray A., The Creativity of the European Court of Human Rights, „Human Rights Law Review” 2005, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 57-79.
  53. Naqvi Y., The right to the truth in international law: fact or fiction?, „International Review of the Red Cross” 2006, vol. 88.
  54. Naucke W., Interpretation and Analogy in Criminal Law, „Brigham Young University Law Review” 1986, no. 3.
  55. Nedjati Z. M., Human Rights under the European Convention, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 1978.
  56. Panebianco G., The nulla poena sine culpa principle in European courts case law [in:] S. Ruggeri (ed.), Human Rights in European Criminal Law, Springer, Cham 2015.
  57. Peristeridou Ch., The Principle of Legality in European Criminal Law, Intersentia, Cambridge 2015.
  58. Pieszczek M., Zasada lex retro non agit w kontekście zbrodni wojennych - rozważania na tle orzeczeń ETPCz w sprawie Kononov v. Łotwa [The principle of lex retro non agit in the context of war crimes – a few comments on the case of Kononov v Lithuania], „Europejski Przegląd Sądowy” 2011, no. 6, pp. 14-23.
  59. Raz J., The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009.
  60. Seibert-Fohr A., Prosecuting Serious Human Rights Violations, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009.
  61. Sroka T., [in:] M. Safjan, L. Bosek (eds.), Konstytucja RP. Tom I. Komentarz do art. 1–86 [The Constitution of Poland. Volume I. Commentary on Article 1-86], Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck, Warszawa 2016.
  62. Starmer K., European Human Rights Law, Legal Action Group, London 2000.
  63. The judgment of Trybunał Konstytucyjny (the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland) of 5 May 2004, P 2/03, OTK-A 2004, No. 5, item 39.
  64. The judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland of 17 May 2012, K 10/11, OTK-A 2012, No 5, item 51.
  65. The judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland of 18 October 2004, P 8/04, OTK-A 2004, No 9, item 92.
  66. Utrat-Milecki J., The effects of the civilising process on penal developments in the European Union [in:] J.B. Banach-Gutierrez, Ch. Harding (eds.), EU Criminal Law and Policy: Values, Principles and Methods, Routledge, London/New York 2017.
  67. Wilt H. van der, Nullum Crimen and International Criminal Law: The Relevance of the Foreseeability Test, „Nordic Journal of International Law” 2015, vol. 84.
  68. Witte B. de, The use of the ECHR and Convention case law by the European Court of Justice [in:] P. Popelier, C. Van De Heyning, P. Van Nuffel (eds.), Human Rights Protection in the European Legal Order: The Interaction Between the European and the National Courts, Intersentia, Cambridge 2011.
  69. Zoll A., [in:] A. Zoll (eds.), Kodeks karny. Część ogólna. Komentarz. Tom I [The penal code. General part. Commentary. Volume I], Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2007.
  70. Zoll A., [in:] T. Bojarski (eds.), System prawa karnego. Tom II, Źródła prawa karnego [System of criminal law. Volume II. Sources of criminal law], Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck, Warszawa 2011.
  71. Zoll A., Okoliczności wyłączające bezprawność czynu (zagadnienia ogólne) [Circumstances excluding unlawfulness of an act (general issues)], Wydawnictwo Prawnicze, Warszawa 1982.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.