Since the Human Rights Act 1998, scholars and courts have dedicated considerable attention to the presumption of innocence. A major strand of the ensuing debate has focused on the scope of this safeguard. Many academics have argued in favour of according to the presumption a substantive- as opposed to a procedural-role. In otherwords, these scholars maintain that the presumption set in art. 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) should have some influence on the definition of criminality. Courts seemsympathetic to this approach, albeit not following it to the full extent. The article, instead, defends a procedural understanding of the presumption of innocence, on the basis of interpretive arguments concerning art. 6(2) ECHR. Besides, it shows that adopting this conception does not entail lowering the protection of the individual before the substantive criminal law.