Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BATIASHVILI v. GEORGIA

  Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);No violation of ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [FRE]

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 27.02.1980 - 6903/75

  DEWEER c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  However, the Court is compelled to look behind the appearances and investigate the realities of the situation before it (see, mutatis mutandis, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, § 44, Series A no. 35, and Kaleja v. Latvia, no. 22059/08, § 38, 5 October 2017).

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of a fair criminal trial that is required by paragraph 1 (see, among many other authorities, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, § 56, Series A no. 35; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 35, Series A no. 308; and Natsvlishvili and Togonidze v. Georgia, no. 9043/05, § 103, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).

• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 8660/79

  Minelli ./. Schweiz

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  Article 6 § 2 prohibits the premature expression by the tribunal of the opinion that the person "charged with a criminal offence" is guilty before he or she has been so proved according to law (see, among many other authorities, Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, § 37, Series A no. 62, and Pe?.a v. Croatia, no. 40523/08, § 138, 8 April 2010).
• EGMR, 27.11.2003 - 62902/00

  ZOLLMANN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  Such allegedly mala fide conduct, if established or inferred during the Court's examination on the merits, combined with the close temporal proximity between the timing of the release of the recording, the questioning of the applicant and the bringing of the charge could attract, in the particular circumstances of the present case, the protection of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention (contrast and compare, Zollman v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 62902/00, ECHR 2003-XII, and Blake, cited above, §§ 120-121 and 123) from the moment the allegedly manipulated version of the recording was made available to the public by the Ministry of the Interior.

 
• EGMR, 29.04.2014 - 9043/05

  NATSVLISHVILI AND TOGONIDZE v. GEORGIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of a fair criminal trial that is required by paragraph 1 (see, among many other authorities, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, § 56, Series A no. 35; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 35, Series A no. 308; and Natsvlishvili and Togonidze v. Georgia, no. 9043/05, § 103, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 19.10.2000 - 27785/95

  WLOCH v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  The opportunity of challenging effectively the statements or views which the prosecution bases on specific documents in the file may in certain instances presuppose that the defence be given access to these documents (see W?‚och v. Poland, no. 27785/95, § 127, ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  Consequently, States do not have to answer for their actions before an international body before they have had an opportunity to put matters right through their own legal system (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V, with further references, and Sabeh El Leil v. France [GC], no. 34869/05, § 32, 29 June 2011, with further references).
• EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 23541/94

  Recht auf Akteneinsicht bei der Haftprüfung (wesentliche Verfahrensakten; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  While national law may satisfy this requirement in various ways, whatever method is chosen should ensure that the other party will be aware that observations have been filed and will have a real opportunity to comment thereon (see Garcia Alva v. Germany, no. 23541/94, § 39, 13 February 2001, and Albrechtas v. Lithuania, no. 1886/06, § 73, 19 January 2016).
• EGMR, 08.03.2006 - 59532/00

  BLECIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  However, since this is a matter which goes to the Court's jurisdiction, the Court must examine it of its own motion (see Mirovni In?.titut v. Slovenia, no. 32303/13, § 27, 13 March 2018, see also Blecic v. Croatia [GC], no. 59532/00, § 67, ECHR 2006 III).
• EGMR, 10.02.1995 - 15175/89

  ALLENET DE RIBEMONT c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.10.2019 - 8284/07

  The Court reiterates that the presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of a fair criminal trial that is required by paragraph 1 (see, among many other authorities, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, § 56, Series A no. 35; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 35, Series A no. 308; and Natsvlishvili and Togonidze v. Georgia, no. 9043/05, § 103, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).

• EGMR, 28.11.2023 - 25551/18

  TADIC v. CROATIA

  The Court further notes that the applicant never challenged the authenticity of the published Security Intelligence Agency recordings or the transcripts thereof, and nor did he ever argue that they had in any way been edited or modified before being published in the media (contrast Batiashvili v. Georgia, no. 8284/07, §§ 87-97, 10 October 2019).
• EGMR, 07.06.2022 - 30464/13

  AKHALAIA v. GEORGIA

  Furthermore, the investigations in all four criminal cases were complex tasks for the domestic authorities, owing, among other considerations, to the passage of time between the occurrence of the acts in issue and the start of the investigation, the large number of witnesses and co-accused to be examined in each case and the difficulties inherent in the prosecution of criminal offences allegedly committed by high-ranking officials, which the applicant was at the time (compare, mutatis mutandis, Batiashvili v. Georgia, no. 8284/07, §§ 58-59, 10 October 2019).