Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VOLKOV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  No violation of Art. 6-1 (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 08.03.2005 - 64056/00
• EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 64056/00

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 24.04.2001 - 36337/97

  B. AND P. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 64056/00

  Thus, it may on occasion be necessary under Article 6 to limit the open and public nature of proceedings in order, for example, to protect the safety or privacy of witnesses, or to promote the free exchange of information and opinion in the pursuit of justice (see B. and P. v. the United Kingdom, nos. 36337/97 and 35974/97, § 37, ECHR 2001-III, with further references).
• EGMR, 23.02.1994 - 18928/91

  FREDIN c. SUÈDE (N° 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 64056/00

  They argued that there had been exceptional circumstances which had justified, according to the Court's case-law, dispensing with a public hearing in the applicant's case (cf. Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171-A, p. 20, § 64; Fredin v. Sweden (no. 2), judgment of 23 February 1994, Series A no. 283-A, pp.
• EGMR, 08.12.1983 - 7984/77

  PRETTO ET AUTRES c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 64056/00

  By rendering the administration of justice visible, publicity contributes to the achievement of the aim of Article 6 § 1, namely a fair trial, the guarantee of which is one of the fundamental principles of any democratic society (see Pretto and Others v. Italy, judgment of 8 December 1983, Series A no. 71, § 21).
• EGMR, 28.06.1984 - 7819/77

  CAMPBELL AND FELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 64056/00

  There is a high expectation of publicity in ordinary criminal proceedings, which may well concern dangerous individuals, notwithstanding the attendant security problems (see Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 28 June 1984, Series A no. 80, § 87).
• EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 11855/85

  H?KANSSON AND STURESSON v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.12.2007 - 64056/00

  They argued that there had been exceptional circumstances which had justified, according to the Court's case-law, dispensing with a public hearing in the applicant's case (cf. Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171-A, p. 20, § 64; Fredin v. Sweden (no. 2), judgment of 23 February 1994, Series A no. 283-A, pp.

• BVerfG, 14.03.2012 - 2 BvR 2405/11

  Zum Grundsatz der Verfahrensöffentlichkeit - hier: Verbot des Tragens von …

  Sie ist außerdem ein Mittel, um das Vertrauen in die Gerichtsbarkeit zu sichern (vgl. EGMR, Urteil vom 8. Dezember 1983 - 8273/78 -, Axen/Deutschland, Tz. 25, EGMR-E 2, 321 ; EGMR, Urteil vom 22. Februar 1984 - 8209/78 -, Sutter/Schweiz, Tz. 26, EGMR-E 2, 345 ; EGMR, Urteil vom 14. November 2000 - 35115/97 -, Riepan/Österreich, Tz. 27; EGMR, Urteil vom 7. Juni 2007 - 66941/01 -, Zagorodnikov/Russland, Tz. 20; EGMR, Urteil vom 4. Dezember 2007 - 64056/00 -, Volkov/Russland, Tz. 25; EGMR, Urteil vom 4. Dezember 2008 - 28617/03 -, Belashev/Russland, Tz. 79).