64 Human Rights in Counter-Terrorism Investigations Entering private premises and seizing private property are interferences with human rights and, therefore, have to be prescribed by law in accordance with international human rights standards. They also have to be justified, necessary, proportionate and non-discriminatory. In the absence of relevant provisions in domestic legislation, the conditions under which interferences with human rights might be lawful should be specified in police regulations. Moreover, national legislation authorizing the police to enter and search premises and to seize items as evidence should set limits to this power. Investigators should ensure that they understand both the letter and spirit of the law. In some jurisdictions, evidence obtained in breach of the law is automatically excluded from being used in any subsequent trial, because allowing such evidence is regarded as a violation of the right to a fair trial. Courts in other jurisdictions look at all the circumstances surrounding the breach of the rules in order to assess whether the admissibility of such evidence would affect the overall fairness of the trial.65 Investigators should also be aware that, while the initial seizure may have been lawful, retaining the items seized for an excessive period without justification can amount to a violation of property rights. 65 The European Court of Human Rights also adopts this practice and explained its approach in the case ECtHR, Allan v. UK, Application No. 48539/99, 5 November 2002, paras. 42–43, <http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001–60713>. 66 ECtHR, Elçi and others v. Turkey, Applications No. 23145/93, 25091/94 13 November 2003, <http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001–61442>.