such as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to which the United Kingdom and France are parties.
Anglo-American Heritage. In making such determinations, a balance must be achieved between protecting the rights of the accused and the interests of the state and society. Over the centuries, criminal procedure in England, the United States and other countries, which have generally adhered to English principles of jurisprudence, was based in large part, according to Fellman, on "solicitude for the plight of one accused of a crime." Protection of the rights of criminal defendants evolved first in the royal courts and was enforced through judge-made common law decisions. At their core was the presumption of innocence and notions of procedural fairness or due process of law. The primacy of the rule of law was epitomized by Chancellor Coke's statement to King James I in the early 17th century that "the king is not subject to anyone, but God and the law." Former Justice Felix Frankfurter of the American Supreme Court said that "the history of liberty has largely been the history of the observance of procedural safeguards."
The presumption of innocence, the requirement that the state prove its case against the accused beyond any reasonable doubt, was buttressed by its corollary, the privilege against self-incrimination, which is part of England's unwritten constitution and is incorporated in the Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the U. S. Constitution which states, inter alia, that "no person . . . shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." These and other procedural safeguards, such as the right of all citizens to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, the right of the accused to be informed of criminal charges, to cross-examine witnesses and to a speedy and public trial before a jury of one's peers, and the guarantee against being subjected to double jeopardy, form part of th...