Aim: is to analyze the current state of the common means of communication and analysis of legislation in the field of mutual verbal and non-verbal communication between detained third-country nationals and police officers within the detention facilities in selected EU countries, which affects the prevention of misunderstandings and conflicts with particular respect to protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms of the detained foreigners.
Methodology: Analysis and comparison of the respective legislative documents in selected EU countries and the European Court of Human Rights Case-law related to the violation of Article 5(2) regarding the right to language assistance is conducted in order to be enable a detained person to communicate in language a detained person understands as these rights directly affects the human rights, namely the right to liberty and security, of a third-country national detained in detention facility within the territory of the EU country.
Findings: The analysis of the respective legislative documents within the selected EU countries showed differences in interpretation and consequently also implementation of the right to language assistance that is guaranteed as one of the procedural safeguards in the context of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Different interpretation and implementation of the right to language assistance prevents effective communication between police officers and third-country nationals detained in detention facilities and causes frustration on both sides, especially during the times of migration crises when the effective communication becomes one of the main tools in prevention of misunderstandings and conflicts. The list of common peculiarities experienced across the EU countries was made. The analysis of the European Court of Human Rights case law proved remaining problems in provision of language assistance causing unnecessary complications for the EU countries and affecting the human rights of the third-country nationals detained in detention facilities.
Value: The value of the study lies in provision of general overview of the remaining problems experienced by both – the police officers representing the respective EU countries and third-country nationals arriving into the territory of the EU and being detained in detention facilities, resulting from different interpretation and implementation of one of the human rights – right to language assistance which is guaranteed as a procedural safeguard at the international and European level, and at the national level of the respective EU countries. By detailed analysis of the core legal documents and the European Court of Human Rights case law, the attention is drawn to the legal consequences for the EU Member States. To prevent the negative consequences, the areas of required amendments are pointed out.