search

… 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 . ... 3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: (...) …

… Lastly, the Government submitted that the applicant had been tried by an and by , composed of pre-existing ordinary courts, whose judges enjoyed constitutional safeguards. They disputed that the disciplinary investigation opened against certain judges had had any impact on the independence or impartiality of the court, as that procedure was separate from the judicial examination of the case. …

… The first, second, third and fifth applicants complained that they were denied a fair hearing by an and by , in breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads in its relevant parts as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 93. …

… In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by ... 2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law. ...” The parties’ submissions The Government 97. …

… In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, and by . ... ... 7. No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an offence for which he has already been finally convicted or acquitted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of each country.” 2. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 118. …

… SECOND SECTION CASE OF AL NASHIRI v. LITHUANIA (Application no. 31908/22) JUDGMENT Art 1 • Jurisdiction of respondent State for alleged Convention violations of a terrorist suspect’s right during the United States (“US”) Central Intelligence Agency extraordinary rendition operations • Responsibility capable of being engaged Art 35 § 2 (b) • Art 3 (substantive and procedural) • Art 5 • Art 13 (+ Art 3) • Matter already submitted to another international procedure • Complaints substantially the same …

… He relied on Article 6 of the Convention, which in so far as relevant reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” A. Admissibility 1. The parties’ submissions (a) The Government 64. The Government argued that Article 6 § 1 was not engaged. They relied on the two-limbed test established in Vilho Eskelinen and Others v. …

… They 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 .” Admissibility 91. …

… Article 6 § 1, in so far as relevant, reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” A. Admissibility 1. Compliance with the four-month rule (a) The parties’ submissions 47. …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” A. Admissibility 42. The Government did not raise any objections as to the admissibility of the applicant’s complaints. 43. …

… He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which in its relevant part reads as follows: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by . ...” Admissibility 26. The Court notes that this complaint is neither manifestly ill-founded nor inadmissible on any other grounds listed in Article 35 of the Convention. It must therefore be declared admissible. …