Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 41585/98

The right to be informed of the nature and the cause of the accusation must be considered in the light of the accused's right to prepare his defence (see e.g. Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, §§ 51-54, ECHR 1999-II).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 41585/98

This requirement is satisfied where the individual can know from the wording of the relevant provision and, if need be, with the assistance of the courts" interpretation of it and appropriate legal advice, what acts or omissions will make him criminally liable (see Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany [GC], nos. 34044/96, 35532/97 and 44801/98, §§ 50-51, ECHR 2001-II).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 41585/98

(b) As to his complaint that the Minister of Justice's public statement in March 2001 on white-collar criminality violated his presumption of innocence, the Court recalls that the presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 6 § 2 of the Convention is one of the elements of a fair criminal trial guaranteed by Article 6 § 1. Where a civil servant, without any qualification or reservation, makes a declaration with the effect of encouraging the public to believe that an accused is guilty and, secondly, prejudging the assessment of the facts by the competent judicial authority, there may a breach of the right of the accused to remain innocent until proved guilty according to law (see Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, § 41).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 41585/98

The Court refers on this point to its established case-law (see Schenk v. Switzerland, judgment of 12 July 1988, Series A no. 140, p. 25, § 45).

Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 41585/98

The objective impartiality may, however, be jeopardised if a judge takes part in several consecutive stages of the same set of proceedings (see, e.g., Piersack v. Belgium, judgment of 1 October 1982, Series A no. 53, pp. 14-15, § 30).