For procedural rights to offer concrete legal protection to suspects and accused persons across the EU, their scope must be clear and precisely defined. Furthermore, in the absence of appropriate measures of redress when violations occur, such rights risk being insufficient or even illusory. The judgment delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Barało provides an opportunity to reflect on these two crucial aspects of European procedural safeguards in the context of suspect vulnerability. Prima facie, the ruling appears to finally acknowledge the need to strengthen the protection of vulnerable suspects or accused persons. Notably, the CJEU elaborates on the content of the reasonable accommodation obligations arising under Directive 2013/48 on the right of access to a lawyer and Directive 2016/1919 on the right to legal aid. However, while the ruling shows an increased sensitivity to vulnerability in EU criminal procedure, a significant gap persists regarding the ratione personae scope of the procedural safeguards intended for this category. Additionally, the ruling has broader implications concerning the protection of procedural rights in the EU. This paper critically examines the role of Barało in shaping safeguards for vulnerable suspects in light of the evolving concept of vulnerability in the European legal space. Furthermore, based on the premise that there can be no right without a remedy, this paper zooms in on the issues of effective remedies and adequate redress for violations of procedural rights in criminal proceedings.
Ancona et al. (Sun,) studied this question.