The article examines the issue of respecting human rights during the forced collection of biological samples. The aim of the work is to study the procedural principles of observing human rights during the forced collection of biological samples. Study the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on the admissibility and legality of the forced collection of biological samples. The methodological basis of the study is general scientific methods (analysis and synthesis, generalization), as well as special legal methods (formal legal, systemic legal). To compare the standards of the European Court of Human Rights with the norms of criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine, the comparative legal method was used. Results. The collection of biological samples in criminal proceedings is an investigative (search) action aimed at obtaining evidence, since during the pre-trial investigation, biological samples carry important evidentiary information, given that their study makes it possible to clarify the circumstances of a criminal offense, establish the involvement of a person in the commission of a criminal offense, as well as identify a person. Conclusions. The collection of biological samples in criminal proceedings is associated with a violation of the constitutional rights of a person to inviolability and respect for private life. The practice of the European Court of Human Rights shapes the aspects of the admissibility of interference with a person’s private life and is based on compliance with the principles of legality and proportionality, ensuring fundamental human rights and freedoms during the collection of biological samples. In addition, the European Court of Human Rights determines the standards for the collection of biological samples in criminal proceedings and the limits of the application of coercive measures, and individual cases contain assessments of the legality of the collection of biological samples under certain circumstances and are aimed at restoring the violated rights of a person during the pre-trial investigation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maryna Voichyshena (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: