DOCSLIB.ORG

Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights Can Be Accessed at This Address

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights Can Be Accessed at This Address Strasbourg, 05 December 2018 PC-OC (2011) 21 REV 12 [PC-OC/Documents 2011/ PC-OC(2011) 21 rev12] http://www.coe.int/tcj/ EUROPEAN COMMITTEE ON CRIME PROBLEMS (CDPC) COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON THE OPERATION OF EUROPEAN CONVENTIONS ON CO-OPERATION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS (PC-OC) Case Law by the European Court of Human Rights of Relevance for the Application of the European Conventions on International Co-Operation in Criminal Matters Prepared by Mr Stéphane DUPRAZ, Ms Barbara GOETH-FLEMMICH, Mr Miroslav KUBÍČEK, Mr Eugenio SELVAGGI, Ms Malgorzata SKOCZELAS and Mr Erik VERBERT NOTE: The following index and summaries of cases have been prepared by PC-OC experts and do not bind the Court or the Council of Europe. PC-OC (2011) 21 Rev12 2 Contents A. Index of keywords with relevant case law ............................................................................ 3 B. Summaries of case law relevant for the application of the European Convention on Extradition (CETS 024) and its Additional Protocols (CETS 086, 098 and 209) ................... 34 C. Summaries of case law relevant for the application of the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (CETS 030) and its Additional Protocols (CETS 099 and 182) ................................................................................................................................................ 242 D. Summaries of case law relevant for the application of the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons (CETS 112) and its Additional Protocol (CETS 167) ............................. 258 E. Summaries of case law relevant for the application of the European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Judgments (CETS 070) ................................................... 270 F. Summaries of case law relevant for the application of the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters (CETS 073) .................................................... 272 G. The HUDOC database ....................................................................................................... 273 IMPORTANT NOTES: The following index and summaries of cases have been prepared by PC-OC experts and do not bind the Court or the Council of Europe. The index and summaries are not exhaustive and are to be used only for reference and as a supplementary tool for practitioners. In the index of keywords (A), the keywords, as well as the cases related to each keyword are arranged alphabetically. In the summaries (B through F) of cases relevant for each European convention, the cases are arranged chronologically. Articles of the Convention referred to in each list follow the numbering applicable at the time of the Court’s judgment or decision (i.e. before the renumbering of the Convention’s provisions following from some of the Protocols to the Convention in the earlier case law). Texts of judgments and decisions of the Court can be found in the HUDOC database (see below sub G). Some English translations of the Court’s judgments and decisions, originally delivered in French and available in the HUDOC database, are summaries of the original judgments and decisions and not the judgments and decisions in full. “[GC]” marks Grand Chamber judgments. 3 PC-OC (2011) 21 Rev12 Case Law by the European Court of Human Rights of Relevance for Application of the European Conventions on International Co-operation in Criminal Matters1 A. Index of keywords with relevant case law: Keyword Case Title Application No. absentia – see in absentia Additional Protocol, Article 2 – see transfer of sentenced persons (Additional Protocol, Article 2) Additional Protocol, Article 3 – see transfer of sentenced persons (Additional Protocol, Article 3) admissibility of evidence – see mutual assistance (admissibility of evidence) assurances2 Abdulazhon Isakov v. Russia 14049/08 Abdulkhakov v. Russia 14743/11 Akram Karimov v. Russia 62892/12 Allanazarova v. Russia 46721/15 Al-Moayad v. Germany 35865/03 Azimov v. Russia 67474/11 Babar Ahmad and others v. United Kingdom 24027/07, 11949/08 & 36742/08 (Decision) Babar Ahmad and Others v. United Kingdom 24027/07, 11949/08, 36742/08, 66911/09 & (Judgment) 67354/09 Bakoyev v. Russia 30225/11 Baysakov and others v. Ukraine 54131/08 Ben Khemais v. Italy 246/07 Čalovskis v. Latvia 22205/13 Chahal v. United Kingdom [GC] 22414/93 Chankayev v. Azerbaijan 56688/12 Chentiev and Ibragimov v. Slovakia 21022/08 & 51946/08 1) These Conventions include in particular: CETS Nos. 24 (Extradition and Additional Protocols ETS Nos. 86, 98 and 209), 30 (Mutual assistance in criminal matters and Additional Protocols ETS Nos. 99 and 182), 51 (Supervision of conditionally sentenced or conditionally released offenders), 70 (International validity of criminal judgments), 73 (Transfer of criminal proceedings), 112 (Transfer of sentenced persons and its Additional Protocol ETS No. 167). 2) Including diplomatic assurances. PC-OC (2011) 21 Rev12 4 Cipriani v. Italy 22142/07 Dzhaksybergenov (aka Jaxybergenov) v. 12343/10 Ukraine Einhorn v. France 71555/01 Ermakov v. Russia 43165/10 Gaforov v. Russia 25404/09 Gasayev v. Spain 48514/06 Gayratbek Saliyev v. Russia 39093/13 Harkins and Edwards v. United Kingdom 9146/07 & 32650/07 Ibragimov v. Slovakia 65916/10 K. v. Russia 69235/11 Kadirzhanov and Mamashev v. Russia 42351/13 & 47823/13 Kasymakhunov v. Russia 29604/12 Khamrakulov v. Russia 68894/13 Khaydarov v. Russia 21055/09 Khodzhayev v. Russia 52466/08 Kholmurodov v. Russia 58923/14 King v. United Kingdom 9742/07 Klein v. Russia 24268/08 Kolesnik v. Russia 26876/08 Kozhayev v. Russia 60045/10 Labsi v. Slovakia 33809/08 Latipov v. Russia 77658/11 López Elorza v. Spain 30614/15 Makhmudzhan Ergashev v. Russia 49747/11 Mamadaliyev v. Russia 5614/13 Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC] 46827/99 & 46951/99 Mamazhonov v. Russia 17239/13 M. G. v. Bulgaria 59297/12 Mukhitdinov v. Russia 20999/14 Nabid Abdullayev v. Russia 8474/14 5 PC-OC (2011) 21 Rev12 Nivette v. France 44190/98 Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia 31890/11 O. v. Italy 37257/06 Oleacha Cahuas v. Spain 24668/03 Oshlakov v. Russia 56662/09 Othman (Abu Qatada) v. United Kingdom 8139/09 Ouabour v. Belgium 26417/10 Rrapo v. Albania 58555/10 Rustamov v. Russia 11209/10 Ryabikin v. Russia 8320/04 Saadi v. Italy [GC] 37201/06 Salem v. Portugal 26844/04 Sellem v. Italy 12584/08 Shakurov v. Russia 55822/10 Shamayev and others v. Georgia and Russia 36378/02 Sidikovy v. Russia 73455/11 Soering v. United Kingdom 14038/88 Soldatenko v. Ukraine 2440/07 Tadzhibayev v. Russia 17724/14 Toumi v. Italy 25716/09 Trabelsi v. Italy 50163/08 Trabelsi v. Belgium 140/10 Turgunov v. Russia 15590/14 Umirov v. Russia 17455/11 U. N. v. Russia 14348/15 Yefimova v.Russia 39786/09 Zarmayev v. Belgium 35/10 Zokhidov v. Russia 67286/10 asylum Abdolkhani and Karimnia v. Turkey (No. 1) 30471/08 Abdulkhakov v. Russia 14743/11 A. H. Khan v. United Kingdom 6222/10 PC-OC (2011) 21 Rev12 6 Al Hanchi v. Bosnia and Herzegovina 48205/09 Azimov v. Russia 67474/11 Bajsultanov v. Austria 54131/10 Charahili v. Turkey 46605/07 Collins and Akaziebie v. Sweden 23944/05 Čonka v. Belgium 51564/99 Cruz Varas v. Sweden 15576/89 Dubovik v. Ukraine 33210/07 & 41866/08 Eminbeyli v. Russia 42443/02 Ermakov v. Russia 43165/10 F. N. and Others v. Sweden 28774/09 Gaforov v. Russia 25404/09 Ibragimov v. Slovakia 65916/10 Iskandarov v. Russia 17185/05 Ismoilov and others v. Russia 2947/06 Jabari v. Turkey 40035/98 J. H. v. United Kingdom 48839/09 K. v. Russia 69235/11 Kaboulov v. Ukraine 41015/04 Keshmiri v. Turkey 36370/08 Khamroev and Others v. Ukraine 41651/10 Khaydarov v. Russia 21055/09 Khodzhamberdiyev v. Russia 64809/10 Khodzhayev v. Russia 52466/08 Kolesnik v. Russia 26876/08 Labsi v. Slovakia 33809/08 Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC] 46827/99 & 46951/99 M. G. v. Bulgaria 59297/12 Mokallal v. Ukraine 19246/10 Molotchko v. Ukraine 12275/10 N. v. Finland 38885/02 7 PC-OC (2011) 21 Rev12 Othman (Abu Qatada) v. United Kingdom 8139/09 Peñafiel Salgado v. Spain 65964/01 Rustamov v. Russia 11209/10 Ryabikin v. Russia 8320/04 Shakurov v. Russia 55822/10 S. H. H. v. United Kingdom 60367/10 Sidikovy v. Russia 73455/11 Soliyev v. Russia 62400/10 Sufi and Elmi v. United Kingdom 8319/07 & 11449/07 Sultani v. France 45223/05 Tehrani v. Turkey 32940/08 & 41626/08 & 43616/08 T. I. v. United Kingdom 43844/98 Umirov v. Russia 17455/11 Vilvarajah and others v. United Kingdom 13163/87 & 13164/87 & 13165/87 & 13447/87 & 13448/87 Y. P. and L. P. v. France 32476/06 X. v. Austria and Yugoslavia 2143/64 Zokhidov v. Russia 67286/10 conversion of sentence – see transfer of sentenced persons (conversion of sentence) covert investigations van Wesenbeeck v. Belgium 67496/10 & 52936/12 cruel treatment (see ill-treatment) custody (judicial review) Abdolkhani and Karimnia v. Turkey (No. 1) 30471/08 Abdulazhon Isakov v. Russia 14049/08 Abdulkhakov v. Russia 14743/11 Azimov v. Russia 67474/11 Čalovskis v. Latvia 22205/13 Chahal v. United Kingdom [GC] 22414/93 Čonka v. Belgium 51564/99 Dubovik v. Ukraine 33210/07 & 41866/08 Elmuratov v. Russia 66317/09 Eminbeyli v. Russia 42443/02 PC-OC (2011) 21 Rev12 8 Ermakov v. Russia 43165/10 Gaforov v. Russia 25404/09 Garabayev v. Russia 38411/02 Gayratbek Saliyev v. Russia 39093/13 Ismoilov and others v. Russia 2947/06 K. v. Russia 69235/11 Kaboulov v. Ukraine 41015/04 Kadirzhanov and Mamashev v. Russia 42351/13 & 47823/13 Ketchum v. Romania 15594/11 Khamrakulov v. Russia 68894/13 Khaydarov v. Russia 21055/09 Khodzhayev v. Russia 52466/08 Khudyakova v. Russia 13476/04 Kolesnik v. Russia 26876/08 Kolompar v. Belgium 11613/85 Lynas v. Switzerland 7317/75 Molotchko v. Ukraine 12275/10 M. S. v. Belgium 50012/08 Mukhitdinov v. Russia 20999/14 Nabid Abdullayev v. Russia 8474/14 Nasrulloyev v.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “State of Civil Society Report: 2015
    the year in review State of Civil Society report 2015: THE YEAR IN REVIEW ...these stories tell us that only civil introduction society, in its broadest sense, is taking a It has been another year of hard work and high achievement for civil society. The story of the year since the stance against the 2014 State of Civil Society Report was published has partly been one of a continuing series of attacks on civil concentration of society in the many countries where, when civil society asks difficult questions about power, the powerful seek to silence it. But is has also been a story of impressive and sustained civil society response, in a world that has power in the hands of become more turbulent and contested. a tiny, global, super- rich elite, and against As we show below, civil society faces challenges - of lack of space, under-resourcing and limited access to the attempts of many decision-makers. Civil society also needs continually to prove its connection with and relevance to citizens, political leaders and and it needs to demonstrate its ability to stay ahead of trends and innovate. When civil society groups do not corporate interests do these, they fail. But so often, we see civil society leading the response to crisis, taking on difficult issues, contributing to change, and winning arguments for social justice. to undermine human rights and This year in review section of the 2015 CIVICUS State of Civil Society Report is complemented by our report’s the value of people’s special thematic section on the resourcing for civil society, and the 27 guest contributions, from civil society participation.
    [Show full text]
  • A Trial in Absentia Resulting in a Decision” Within the European Arrest Warrant Framework
    The concept of “a trial in absentia resulting in a decision” within the European Arrest Warrant framework. TEAM POLAND NATIONAL SCHOOL OF JUDICIARY AND PUBLIC PROSECUTION JOANNA GADOMSKA MONIKA STĘPKOWSKA JAKUB GŁUSZYK (prosecutor trainees - participants) BARBARA AUGUSTYNIAK (Judge - tutor) THEMIS COMPETITION SEMI FINAL - A - 2 0 1 8 BARCELONA The concept of “a trial in absentia resulting in a decision” within the European Arrest Warrant framework. TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW 1. INTRODUCTION p. 2-7 1.1. Brief historical insight p. 2 - 3 1.2. Notion of a trial “in absentia” p. 3-4 1.3. Polish perspective p. 4-5 1.4. European Arrest Warrant Framework Decision p. 5-7 2. “TRIAL RESULTING IN A DECISION” – A CASE STUDY p. 7-15 2.1. Case C-399/11 Melloni p. 7-8 2.2. Case C-270/17 PPU Tupikas p. 9 - 10 2.3. Case C-271/17 PPU Zdziaszek p. 11-13 2.4. Case C-571/17 PPU Samet Ardic p. 13-15 3. CONCLUSIONS p.16-19 3.1. Findings p.16-17 3.2. Recommendations p.17-19 BIBLIOGRAPHY AN OVERVIEW This paper addresses selected issues related to the European Arrest Warrant framework that appear when executing a judgment that has been delivered in another Member State as a result of trial in the absence of the defendant. The main focus is placed on answering the question which procedural scenarios could be counted as “an absence of the defendant”, and which legal proceedings fall into the category of “trial resulting in a decision”. This goal is achieved through the examination of the origins of “in absentia” procedures, the European Arrest Warrant framework decision itself, and viewpoints expressed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter “the CJEU”) in selected landmark cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Death Penalty in Iraq UNAMI/OHCHR
    HUMAN RIGHTS UNITED NATIONS Assistance Office of the High Commissioner Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) for Human Rights Human Rights Office Report on the Death Penalty in Iraq UNAMI/OHCHR Baghdad October 2014 Report on the Death Penalty in Iraq UNAMI HUMAN RIGHTS OFFICE and OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS October 2014, Baghdad Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 2. International human rights standards on the use of the death penalty ....... 2 3. Domestic legal framework on the death penalty ........................................ 6 4. Judicial proceedings relating to the death penalty in Iraq ........................ 11 5. Use of the death penalty in Iraq since 2004 ............................................. 19 6. Position of the Government of Iraq on the use of the death penalty ........ 21 7. Allegation of human rights violations in the death penalty cases ........... 22 8. Conclusion ................................................................................................ 26 9. Recommendations ..................................................................................... 27 Report on the Death Penalty in Iraq Page 1 1. Introduction This report on the death penalty in Iraq is published jointly by the Human Rights Office of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). The first section of this report outlines the international human rights standards on the use of the death penalty. The subsequent sections examine the domestic legal framework for the use of the death penalty in Iraq, judicial proceedings in death penalty cases, the implementation of the death penalty since 2004, and the justifications put forward by the Government of Iraq for its continued use. The report concludes with a set of recommendations to the Iraqi authorities, the Government of Kurdistan Region and the international community.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimated Age
    The US National Counterterrorism Center is pleased to present the 2016 edition of the Counterterrorism (CT) Calendar. Since 2003, we have published the calendar in a daily planner format that provides our consumers with a variety of information related to international terrorism, including wanted terrorists; terrorist group fact sheets; technical issue related to terrorist tactics, techniques, and procedures; and potential dates of importance that terrorists might consider when planning attacks. The cover of this year’s CT Calendar highlights terrorists’ growing use of social media and other emerging online technologies to recruit, radicalize, and encourage adherents to carry out attacks. This year will be the last hardcopy publication of the calendar, as growing production costs necessitate our transition to more cost- effective dissemination methods. In the coming years, NCTC will use a variety of online and other media platforms to continue to share the valuable information found in the CT Calendar with a broad customer set, including our Federal, State, Local, and Tribal law enforcement partners; agencies across the Intelligence Community; private sector partners; and the US public. On behalf of NCTC, I want to thank all the consumers of the CT Calendar during the past 12 years. We hope you continue to find the CT Calendar beneficial to your daily efforts. Sincerely, Nicholas J. Rasmussen Director The US National Counterterrorism Center is pleased to present the 2016 edition of the Counterterrorism (CT) Calendar. This edition, like others since the Calendar was first published in daily planner format in 2003, contains many features across the full range of issues pertaining to international terrorism: terrorist groups, wanted terrorists, and technical pages on various threat-related topics.
    [Show full text]
  • Manual on Mutual Legal Assistance and Extradition
    Manual on Mutual Legal Assistance and Extradition UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME Vienna Manual on Mutual Legal Assistance and Extradition UNITED NATIONS New York, 2012 © United Nations, September 2012. All rights reserved. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Publishing production: English, Publishing and Library Section, United Nations Office at Vienna. Contents Page I. Introduction .......................................................... 1 A. The Organized Crime Convention and the need for the present Manual ....... 2 II. Legal traditions and systems and how they affect the provision of international legal assistance ......................................................... 7 A. Legal traditions .................................................... 9 B. The dualist/monist question .......................................... 9 C. A brief overview of the common law and civil law traditions ................ 11 D. How to address the differences: flexibility in the common and civil law traditions ...................................................... 12 III. The legal basis for mutual legal assistance and extradition: general principles ....... 19 A. Mutual legal assistance and extradition .................................. 19 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Questionnaire Concerning Judgments in Absentia and the Possibility of Retrial
    PC-OC (2013) 01 Rev.3 Bil. Strasbourg, 28/04/2014 [PC-OC/Docs 2013/ PC-OC(2013)01 Rev.3 Bil.] www.coe.int/tcj EUROPEAN COMMITTEE ON CRIME PROBLEMS (CDPC) COMITE EUROPEEN POUR LES PROBLEMES CRIMINELS (CDPC) COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON THE OPERATION OF EUROPEAN CONVENTIONS ON CO-OPERATION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS (PC-OC) COMITE D'EXPERTS SUR LE FONCTIONNEMENT DES CONVENTIONS EUROPEENNES SUR LA COOPERATION DANS LE DOMAINE PENAL (PC-OC) Questionnaire concerning judgments in absentia and the possibility of retrial Summary and Compilation of Replies Questionnaire concernant les jugements par défaut et la possibilité d'être rejugé Résumé et compilation des réponses Replies received from: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Malta, the Republic of Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom PC-OC (2013) 01 Rev.3 Bil. Contents/ Table des matières Introduction (English).......................................................................................................................4 Summary of replies to the questionnaire.........................................................................................6 Introduction (français) ....................................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Remedies for the Trial in Absentia. the Recent Romanian Experiences
    UDK 343.137.3(498) Review article REMEDIES FOR THE TRIAL IN ABSENTIA. THE RECENT ROMANIAN EXPERIENCES Adrian Stan, PhD candidate, Teaching and Research Assistant Faculty of Law, West University of Timişoara Timişoara, Romania, Eroilor Blvd, 9A, Timisoara, 300575 Timis, Romania [email protected]; [email protected] ABSTRACT Accepting the fact that a person can be tried without being personally notified is one of the great concessions that the right to a fair proceeding makes to the public interest and the efectiveness of criminal trial. However, the remedy for such a possibility must be itself effective and it is one of the real challenges of the EU states. This is because sometimes it is very difficult to determine, objectively, whether a person has really been out of criminal proceedings or he is just letting it to be believed. So, we are talking about a series of rights and interests in conflict. As we stated, the celerity of the proceedings, finding the truth, the security of the final decisions, the defense and the fair trial. All these problems are encountered when the issue of the judgment in absentia and its remedies are raised. So, the central goal of our paper is outlining the concept of contumacy and observing the Romanian legal order specificities. In Romanian procedural system, the trial can be held in absentia, if the accused is not found at the legal or known residence. The prosecutor or the judge must perform reasonable efforts to find the offender, by carrying out investigations in the labor registers, or at the detention places.
    [Show full text]
  • Reopening of Proceedings in Cases of Trial in Absentia: European Legal Standards and Croatian Law*
    Elizabeta Ivičević Karas, PhD, Associate Professor University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law Trg Republike Hrvatske 14, 10 000 Zagreb [email protected] REOPENING OF PROCEEDINGS IN CASES OF TRIAL IN ABSENTIA: EUROPEAN LEGAL STANDARDS AND CROATIAN LAW* ABSTRACT In contemporary criminal procedure, trial in absentia is considered an exception to the general principle that that a person charged with a criminal offence is entitled to take part at the hear- ing. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights defined several rules on trial in absentia, as prerequisites of compliance with fair trial standards from Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). One of those rules con- cerns the possibility of retrial. Recently Croatia was condemned before in Sanader case, for vio- lation of the right to a fair trial proclaimed in Article 6 ECHR, for the applicant’s inability to obtain a rehearing after conviction in absentia, without prior surrendering to custody based on that conviction. The execution of Sanader judgment included legislative amendments, which were adopted in July 2017. The paper analyses to what extent the present regulation of reopen- ing of proceedings in cases of trial in absentia in Croatian legislation and practice corresponds to the European legal standards. The paper contains theoretical and normative analysis, as well as the research of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and of recent jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia. It showed that in Croatian judicial practice there are doubts on the purpose of reopening of proceedings in case of trial in absentia, which should provide “a fresh determination of the merits of the charge” by a court” in “full respect of defence rights”.
    [Show full text]
  • Questionnaire Concerning Judgments in Absentia and the Possibility of Retrial
    http://www.coe.int/tcj/ Strasbourg, 21 February 2013 PC-OC (2013) 01 [PC-OC/Docs 2013/ PC-OC(2013)1l] EUROPEAN COMMITTEE ON CRIME PROBLEMS (CDPC) COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON THE OPERATION OF EUROPEAN CONVENTIONS ON CO-OPERATION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS (PC-OC) Questionnaire concerning judgments in absentia and the possibility of retrial Summary and Compilation of Replies Replies received from: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Moldova, Norway, Portugal, Russian Federation, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom PC-OC (2013) 01 2 Contents Introduction.......................................................................................................................................4 Summary of replies to the questionnaire.........................................................................................6 Compilation of replies to the questionnaire concerning judgments in absentia and the possibility of retrial.........................................................................................................................11 1. Is it possible in your state to issue a judgment in absentia within the scope of Article 3 of the Second Additional Protocol of the European Convention on Extradition or in similar cases? ..11 2. Are the following decisions according to your domestic law considered as decisions in absentia? (multiple responses possible):......................................................................................29
    [Show full text]
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
    UNITED NATIONS CCPR International covenant Distr. on civil and RESTRICTED* political rights CCPR/C/90/D/1173/2003 26 September 2007 ENGLISH Original: FRENCH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE Ninetieth session 9-27 July 2007 VIEWS Communication No. 1173/2003 Submitted by: Mr. Abdelhamid Benhadj (represented by counsel, Mr. Rachid Mesli) Alleged victim: Ali Benhadj (the author’s brother) State party: Algeria Date of communication: 31 March 2003 (initial submission) Document references: Special Rapporteur’s rule 97 decision, transmitted to the State party on 14 July 2003 (not issued in document form) Date of adoption of Views: 20 July 2007 Subject matter: Arbitrary detention Procedural issues: Power of attorney * Made public by decision of the Human Rights Committee. GE.07-44223 (E) 221007 241007 CCPR/C/90/D/1173/2003 page 2 Substantive issues: Right to liberty and security of person; arbitrary arrest and detention; right to be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person; right to a fair hearing; a competent, independent and impartial tribunal; right to freedom of expression Articles of the Covenant: 7, 9, 10, 12, 14 and 19 Articles of the Optional Protocol: - On 20 July 2007, the Human Rights Committee adopted the annexed text as the Committee’s Views, under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol in respect of communication No. 1173/2003. [ANNEX] CCPR/C/90/D/1173/2003 page 3 Annex VIEWS OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE UNDER ARTICLE 5, PARAGRAPH 4, OF THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS Ninetieth session concerning Communication No.
    [Show full text]
  • Trial Observation Manual for Criminal Proceedings Practitioners Guide No
    Trial Observation Manual for Criminal Proceedings Practitioners Guide No. 5 Guide No. Practitioners Observation Manual for Criminal Proceedings Trial A fair trial is essential, not only for protecting the human rights of the accused and those of victims but also to ensure proper administration of justice, which is a key component of the rule of law. In this context trial observation can be a crucial tool Trial Observation Manual in efforts to defend human rights and the primacy of the rule of law. The right to observe trials stems from for Criminal Proceedings the general right to promote and secure the protec- tion and realisation of human rights. This Practitioners Guide provides the prospective trial observer with practical advice on how to carry out a trial observation. It outlines the various criteria and operational aspects that need to be borne in mind when preparing for, and conducting, a trial observa- tion. It also provides a systematic overview of the international norms and standards relating to fair trial and due process in criminal proceedings. Practitioners Guide No. 5 International Commission of Jurists P.O. Box 91 33 Rue des Bains CH-1211 Geneva 8 Switzerland Trial Observation Manual for Criminal Proceedings Practitioners Guide No. 5 Guide No. Practitioners Observation Manual for Criminal Proceedings Trial A fair trial is essential, not only for protecting the human rights of the accused and those of victims but also to ensure proper administration of justice, which is a key component of the rule of law. In this context trial observation can be a crucial tool Trial Observation Manual in efforts to defend human rights and the primacy of the rule of law.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Criminal Law Associations' Forum
    eucrim 2016 / 2 THE EUROPEAN CRIMINAL LAW ASSOCIATIONS‘ FORUM Focus: The Costs of Non-Europe Dossier particulier: Les coûts de la non-Europe Schwerpunktthema: Kosten des Verzichts auf EU-politisches Handeln Guest Editorial Félix Braz A Europe of Costs and Values in the Criminal Justice Area Claude Moraes Measuring the Added Value of EU Criminal Law Dr. Wouter van Ballegooij The European Public Prosecutor’s Office as a Guardian of the European Taxpayers’ Money Věra Jourová No Added Value of the EPPO? The Current Dutch Approach mr. dr. Jaap van der Hulst L’Europe à la poursuite des droits fondamentaux Bertrand Favreau The Directive on Procedural Safeguards for Children who Are Suspects or Accused Persons in Criminal Proceedings Steven Cras 2016 / 2 ISSUE / ÉDITION / AUSGABE The Associations for European Criminal Law and the Protection of Financial Interests of the EU is a network of academics and practitioners. The aim of this cooperation is to develop a European criminal law which both respects civil liberties and at the same time protects European citizens and the European institutions effectively. Joint seminars, joint research projects and annual meetings of the associations’ presidents are organised to achieve this aim. Contents News* Articles European Union The Costs of Non-Europe Foundations Cooperation 87 A Europe of Costs and Values in 66 Charter of Fundamental Rights 80 European Arrest Warrant the Criminal Justice Area 67 Schengen 80 Criminal Records Claude Moraes 81 E-Justice 81 Law Enforcement Cooperation 90 Measuring the Added Value of EU Institutions Criminal Law 67 Council Dr. Wouter van Ballegooij 67 OLAF 68 Europol 94 The Cost(s) of Non-Europe in the Area 70 Eurojust of Freedom, Security and Justice.
    [Show full text]