The applicant pleaded guilty to charges of drug-dealing on the basis of evidence obtained by a secret listening device installed by the police. He appealed against his conviction, challenging the admission of the tape recording as evidence against him. The House of Lords found no rule on privacy which could prevent the tape being made, and considered that even if the circumstances of the tape recording had been in breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to respect for family and private life), the judge still had a discretion whether to admit the evidence or not. The House of Lords confirmed the judge’s exercise of his discretion to admit the evidence.
The applicant complains that the taped evidence was obtained in violation of Article 8 of the Convention because it did not have an adequate basis in domestic law. He also complains that the use of the taped material, obtained in breach of Article 8, made his trial unfair, in breach of Article 6 of the Convention. Finally he claims that his right to an effective remedy under Article 13 has been violated as the domestic court should have taken into account the fact that the evidence was obtained in breach of Article 8.
Citation: Khan v the United Kingdom (App no 35394/97) ECHR 12 May 2000
(from the official press-release prepared by the Registry Office of the European Court of Human Rights)