The Presumption of Innocence is enshrined in different international human rights documents, including the European Convention on Human Rights. Although the Presumption involves a wide range of aspects and influences, its applicability or its area of application is restricted to some conditions. Most of these documents (like the European Convention on Human Rights) state that the Presumption lies exclusively within the area of “charges of criminal offences”. Contrary to some other conceptions, the Presumption does not orbit “doubt as to obligation” or even “doubt” itself. In truth, it exclusively rotates around charges of criminal offences. Accordingly, the European Court of Human Rights, due to Article 6 (2), in order to determine the area of application of the Presumption faces two concepts: first is the concept of “charge” and the other is concept of “criminal offence”. The main concern of the present research is to scrutinize the Court’s approach to these concepts. In principle the Court views “charge” as a formal notification which is submitted to an authorized public official to an individual. But the Court regards as “charge” any measure by state which has that effect. On the other hand, the Court has created three criteria in order to find out what a criminal offence is. First the Court has regard to the classification of the offence in domestic law. Then, it assesses the offence according to the nature of the offence and the aim of its punishment. As the third criterion, the Court considers the nature of punishment and its severity. In fact, the Court, in its procedure, has tried to interpret these two concepts in a manner which offer more protection to individuals.