People under criminal investigation have reasonable expectations about the privacy that the press must respect, according to UK Supreme Court rules.

The UK Supreme Court has ruled that the right to privacy of the person under investigation takes precedence over freedom of expression, as long as the person in question has not been formally accused by the investigating authority.

The Supreme Court holds that persons under investigation by the authorities have a reasonable expectation of privacy and, therefore, it is a common practice among officers to keep this stage of the investigation confidential, so as not to damage the reputation of an innocent person. However, to determine whether a person is covered by expectations, an objective analysis of the issue is necessary.

She adds that the jurisprudence has agreed to keep the investigations in the investigation stage secret, which will remain until the investigation body decides to file charges with a particular crime. For this reason, all documents that are part of the investigation are private, and therefore, its publication is prohibited in response to the right of the person under investigation and the presumption of his innocence to be honored.

Next, the court clarifies that the presumption of innocence is one of the pillars of criminal proceedings that benefits everyone who is being investigated in all criminal proceedings. However, publishing a criminal investigation clearly violates the legal premise as it harms it publicly, because it is undeniable that public scrutiny will judge it by the impact of the way information is published, causing, in many cases, irreparable harm to your private life and the development of relations.

The Court explains that Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) protects a person’s reputation in a broad way, because it recognizes that a person’s private life can include professional or commercial activities, and therefore, provided that the attack is when the reputation reaches a level of seriousness and harms the person’s right In respect of private life, protection must be granted.

In the end, the court ruled that people under investigation by the authorities, prior to indictment, had a reasonable expectation of privacy that should be protected and warned that freedom of expression was restricted by the precaution afforded by law. In the investigation phase of an investigation.

See the text of the sentence.