b. The ‘Using EU Law in Practice’ Toolkit This Toolkit may be used alongside the ‘Using EU Law in Practice’ Toolkit which contains explanations of the assumptions made about the legal effects of the Roadmap Directives. It also contains an introduction to the concept of ‘invoking the Directive’ through reliance upon remedial mechanisms such as invalidity of procedural acts, exclusion / disregarding of evidence and so on. c. Before and after the implementation deadline The ‘Using EU Law in Practice’ Toolkit, further, contains comments about the use of the Directive in the time prior to its implementation deadline of 27 November 2016. Practitioners interested in using the Directive in court prior to that date should refer to those parts of that Toolkit. Parts I-III of this Toolkit, with arguments as to how to invoke the Directive, assumes that the deadline has passed (meaning provisions can be directly effective). Only Part IV of this Toolkit, addressed to implementation authorities, is aimed at the implementation phase. d. Terminology In this Toolkit, we use the term ‘questioning’ to refer to questioning as to the facts of an offence by police, prosecutors and/or investigative judges; this may have the same meaning as the terms ‘interview’ and ‘interrogation’ in some jurisdictions. e. A word of caution This Toolkit is drafted based on certain assumptions. As mentioned above, we have endeavoured to identify these clearly in the body of the text. This is both in acknowledgment of the fact that there may be other points of view, and in order to ensure you are aware that these are inferences which you will need to be happy to stand by if you are going to rely on them in court. The Toolkit is also drafted with lawyers from all EU Member States in mind. Necessarily, it cannot cater for all individual variations in criminal procedure in the different EU Member States. It cannot take account of existing professional traditions and deontological rules established by national or regional bars. So you will need to adapt our suggestions to work within your own local context. f. Keep in touch With those qualifications, we encourage you to follow the steps in this Toolkit, try out the arguments we propose and to let us know how you get on by contacting us via the contacts in the preface. We will be keen to hear from you about your experience and to share lessons learned from others. B. BEFORE THE DIRECTIVE: REVIEW OF ECHR PRINCIPLES 1. Overall fairness and Article 6(3) guarantees It is important to bear in mind that fair trial principles under Article 6 ECHR are developed by the ECtHR which rules on cases in a subsidiary capacity. In line with Article 1 of the ECHR, it falls to the Contracting States to secure the rights under the ECHR for those within their jurisdiction; the ECtHR mechanism is therefore available only when internal remedies have been exhausted. 6