Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 06.03.2007 - 43923/98 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2007,60283) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
TEZEL v. TURKEY
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d MRK
Partly inadmissible (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 30.01.2001 - 43923/98
- EGMR, 06.03.2007 - 43923/98
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 30544/96
GARCÍA RUIZ v. SPAIN
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.03.2007 - 43923/98
The Court's task is not to examine whether the applicant was guilty or innocent of the offences of which he was convicted, but to ascertain whether the proceedings as a whole, including the way which the evidence was taken, were fair (see Schenk v. Switzerland, judgment of 12 July 1988, Series A no. 140, p. 29, § 46, and García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I). - EGMR, 12.07.1988 - 10862/84
SCHENK c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.03.2007 - 43923/98
The Court's task is not to examine whether the applicant was guilty or innocent of the offences of which he was convicted, but to ascertain whether the proceedings as a whole, including the way which the evidence was taken, were fair (see Schenk v. Switzerland, judgment of 12 July 1988, Series A no. 140, p. 29, § 46, and García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I). - EGMR, 22.04.1992 - 12351/86
VIDAL c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.03.2007 - 43923/98
As regards the applicant's complaint concerning the alleged refusal of the domestic authorities to hear the applicant's witnesses, the Court recalls that Article 6 § 3 (d) leaves it to the domestic courts to assess whether it is appropriate to call witnesses; it does not require the attendance and examination of every witness on the accused's behalf (see Perna v. Italy [GC], no. 48898/99, § 29, ECHR 2003-V; Bricmont v. Belgium, judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 158, p.31, § 89; and Vidal v. Belgium, judgment of 22 April 1992, Series A no. 235-B, pp. 32-33, § 33). - EGMR, 06.12.1988 - 10588/83
BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.03.2007 - 43923/98
The Court recalls that the presumption of innocence will be violated if, without the accused's having previously been proved guilty according to law, and notably without his having had the opportunity of exercising his rights of defence, a judicial decision concerning him reflects an opinion that he is guilty (see Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain, judgment of 6 December 1988, Series A no. 146, § 91). - EKMR, 15.07.1986 - 9938/82
BRICMONT v. BELGIUM
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.03.2007 - 43923/98
As regards the applicant's complaint concerning the alleged refusal of the domestic authorities to hear the applicant's witnesses, the Court recalls that Article 6 § 3 (d) leaves it to the domestic courts to assess whether it is appropriate to call witnesses; it does not require the attendance and examination of every witness on the accused's behalf (see Perna v. Italy [GC], no. 48898/99, § 29, ECHR 2003-V; Bricmont v. Belgium, judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 158, p.31, § 89; and Vidal v. Belgium, judgment of 22 April 1992, Series A no. 235-B, pp. 32-33, § 33).