search

… In the determination ... of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . ... 3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: ... (d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him; ...” A. …

… The relevant part of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention reads as follows: “In the determination of ...any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . ...” A. Admissibility 43. The Court notes that the complaint is not manifestly ill-founded, within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention. It further notes that it is not inadmissible on any other grounds. …

… FIRST SECTION CASE OF AL NASHIRI v. ROMANIA (Application no. 33234/12) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 31 May 2018 FINAL 08/10/2018 This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. PROCEDURE THE FACTS I.  PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FACTS II.  EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT III.  BACKGROUND TO THE CASE A.  Terrorist attacks of which the applicant has been suspected 1.  USS Cole bombing in 2000 2.  MV Limburg bombing in …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by .” Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.” 10. …

… In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing ... by an and by . ...” A. Admissibility 1. Applicability of Article 6 of the Convention 28. The Government argued that the imposition of an administrative fine on the applicant did not constitute determination of a criminal charge against him. …

… THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 27. The applicant complained that the proceedings had been unfair, in that the domestic court had not held an oral hearing and had imposed an administrative fine without granting him a hearing. He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which, in so far as relevant, reads as follows: “1. …

… They also argued that the trial courts had not been “ by ” having no jurisdiction in their cases. The applicants relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the relevant part of which reads as follows: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 30. …

… ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION AS REGARDS THE PRINCIPLE OF A “ BY ” 128. The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that Judge A.K. had been assigned to examine their case in the trial court in breach of Articles 350 § 1 and 351 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. They argued that this entailed a violation of their right to have their case examined by an and and/or their right to a fair trial. …

… Article 6 § 1 reads, in so far as relevant: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 129. The Court will examine the complaint that Judge A.K. was selected to hear the applicants’ case in violation of the relevant provisions of domestic law under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention with regard to the requirement of a “tribunal established by law”. …

… THE I.  ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 41.  The applicant complained that his second criminal case had not been examined by an . He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the relevant parts of which read as follows: “In the determination ...of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” A.  Admissibility 42.   …

… All persons shall be equal before the courts and . In the determination of ... his rights and obligations in a suit at , everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, and by ...” B. American Convention on Human Rights 49. The relevant provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights, 22 November 1969, read as follows: Article 8. Right to a Fair Trial “1. …

… Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, , and , previously by , ... for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labour, fiscal, or any other nature. ...” Article 25. Right to Judicial Protection “1. …

… Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and previously by . Everyone shall have the possibility of being advised, defended and represented. ...” THE LAW I. PRELIMINARY ISSUES A. The Government’s preliminary objection 52. In their written submissions the Government invited the Court to declare the application inadmissible, without further elaborating on this request. 53. …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by ...” 95. The Government contested that argument. A. The nature and scope of the dispute 96. The Court considers it appropriate to clarify at the outset the nature of the present dispute and what exactly is at stake. …