The article examines the principle of international criminal justice - the presumption of innocence of the defendant. Its content, limits are clarified, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights is analyzed, as well as the practice of international tribunals on the presumption of innocence of the defendant as part of his right to a fair trial.It is established that presumptions of a legal nature on matters of fact and law are admissible in international criminal proceedings only if the defendant is given the opportunity to refute them and prove his innocence.The presumption of innocence is enshrined as a principle and right of the defendant in modern international criminal procedure law, primarily in the Statutes of international courts and tribunals. An analysis of the relevant provisions of these statutes shows that the presumption of innocence means at least that: 1) the burden of proof lies on the prosecution; 2) evidence of guilt must meet a certain standard; 3) in some cases, the presumption may include additional rights, such as the right to bail, as well as additional conditions, such as the condition of a guilty plea only by a lawful court or following a trial in which all rights of defense have been secured, etc. .; 4) the defendant has the right to doubt in his favor; 5) the right of the defendant to remain silent; 6) the right of the defendant to a certain standard of conviction or acquittal; 7) theright of the defendant to compensation in case of acquittal. The formulation of the presumption of innocencein the Covenant and the Convention allows the establishment of the innocence of the defendant by different procedures depending on “what is at stake”, ie depending on the legal consequences arising from the establishment of guilt. If the defendant can be released from criminal liability and punishment, the procedure for rebutting the presumption of his innocence may be different, and the defendant, of course, must be provided with all means of protection against prosecution.