Abstract

In the recent "Maslarova" and "Lolov" cases, the European Court of Human Rights provides a thorough reflection on the scope and the limits of the right to be presumed innocent, namely through the lenses of the prohibition on prejudicial statements by public authorities. First, it is submitted that relevant case-law is fragmentated, no clear divide between permissible and impermissible statements emerging therefrom. Second, the lack of effective remedies against such violations represents an un-solved issue too: while the cases under analysis are the first in which the Court has found a violation of Art. 13 ECHR in conjunction with Art. 6, par. 2, ECHR, dedicated mechanisms for invoking the violation of the right to be presumed innocent are absent in several domestic legal orders, in contravention also with the recent EU Directive 2016/343. Lastly, some remarks on the Italian situation are provided with a view to discussing such problems under a de "jure condendo" perspective.