Assisting the Defendant in Unlocking His Smartphone: Is Coercion Permissible?

The author of the article discusses whether an investigator in the interests of evidence has the right to demand from the accused to help him unlock his smartphone. The main attention is paid to the conceptual dimension of the problem. Possible forms of coercion: requesting a password, demanding unlocking, using biometrics, are examined in the light of the rule of nemo tenetur (the right not to testify against oneself). The scope of this rule and the possibility of exceptions, the problem of its mandatory clarification and the consequences of violations are considered. At the end of the article the practical complexity of the raised issue is revealed, its connection with the criminal procedural policy of the State is demonstrated, and an assumption is made about a possible vector of its solution. Turning to foreign law, the author takes into account the experience of the USA and Germany as bright representatives of different models of criminal procedure.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zakon
Published
2025-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.37239/0869-4400-2025-22-2-69-80
Primary Topic
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assisting the Defendant in Unlocking His Smartphone: Is Coercion Permissible?

Sergey G. Konovalov
Zakon
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
article

Assisting the Defendant in Unlocking His Smartphone: Is Coercion Permissible?

Sergey G. Konovalov
article en

Abstract

The author of the article discusses whether an investigator in the interests of evidence has the right to demand from the accused to help him unlock his smartphone. The main attention is paid to the conceptual dimension of the problem. Possible forms of coercion: requesting a password, demanding unlocking, using biometrics, are examined in the light of the rule of nemo tenetur (the right not to testify against oneself). The scope of this rule and the possibility of exceptions, the problem of its mandatory clarification and the consequences of violations are considered. At the end of the article the practical complexity of the raised issue is revealed, its connection with the criminal procedural policy of the State is demonstrated, and an assumption is made about a possible vector of its solution. Turning to foreign law, the author takes into account the experience of the USA and Germany as bright representatives of different models of criminal procedure.

ZakonVol. 22(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.