Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DAMIR SIBGATULLIN v. RUSSIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 38, Art. 38 Abs. 1 Buchst. a, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Article 6+6-3-d - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial Article 6-3-d - Witnesses) Violation of Article 38 - Examination of the case and friendly settlement proceedings ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05
• EGMR, 28.05.2014 - 1413/05
• EGMR - 1413/05

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

• EGMR, 13.07.2006 - 26853/04

  POPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  Lastly, the Court refers to its settled case-law to the effect that, where it finds that an applicant has been convicted despite a potential infringement of his rights as guaranteed by Article 6 of the Convention, he should, as far as possible, be put in the position in which he would have been had the requirements of that provision not been disregarded, and that the most appropriate form of redress would, in principle, be trial de novo or the reopening of the proceedings, if requested (see Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, § 210 in fine, ECHR 2005-IV; Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 264, 13 July 2006; and Vladimir Romanov, cited above, § 118).
• EGMR, 15.12.2011 - 26766/05

  Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Zeugen (Recht auf ein faires Verfahren: …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  The Court reiterates the principles laid down in its judgment of Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom ([GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, §§ 119 and 147, 15 December 2011), according to which where a conviction is based solely or decisively on the evidence of absent witnesses, the Court must subject the proceedings to the most searching scrutiny.
• EGMR, 15.06.1992 - 12433/86

  LÜDI v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  Having cited the Court's judgments in the cases of Isgrò v. Italy (19 February 1991, Series A no. 194-A), and Lüdi v. Switzerland (15 June 1992, Series A no. 238), the Government argued that the Convention does not preclude the use of statements by witnesses who have only been interviewed by investigating authorities and whose appearance before a trial court cannot be obtained.

 
• EGMR, 26.04.1991 - 12398/86

  ASCH v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  Given that the guarantees in paragraph 3 of Article 6 are specific aspects of the right to a fair trial set forth in paragraph 1, it is appropriate to examine these complaints under the two provisions taken together (see Asch v. Austria, 26 April 1991, § 25, Series A no. 203).
• EGMR, 28.08.1992 - 13161/87

  ARTNER v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  In particular, in the event that the witnesses cannot be examined and that this is due to the fact that they are missing, the authorities must make a reasonable effort to secure their presence (see Artner v. Austria, 28 August 1992, § 21 in fine, Series A no. 242-A; Delta v. France, 19 December 1990, § 37, Series A no. 191-A; and Rachdad v. France, no. 71846/01, § 25, 13 November 2003).
• EGMR, 19.12.1990 - 11444/85

  DELTA c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  In particular, in the event that the witnesses cannot be examined and that this is due to the fact that they are missing, the authorities must make a reasonable effort to secure their presence (see Artner v. Austria, 28 August 1992, § 21 in fine, Series A no. 242-A; Delta v. France, 19 December 1990, § 37, Series A no. 191-A; and Rachdad v. France, no. 71846/01, § 25, 13 November 2003).
• EGMR, 18.05.2000 - 41488/98

  VELIKOVA c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  Drawing inferences from the Government's conduct (see Velikova v. Bulgaria, no. 41488/98, § 77, ECHR 2000-VI) and taking into account the evidential value of the material evidence, the Court concludes that the depositions made by the eleven witnesses during the pre-trial investigation and read out by the Regional Court constituted virtually the sole direct and objective evidence on which the court's findings of guilt were based.
• EGMR, 14.12.1999 - 37019/97

  A.M. v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  According to the Court's case-law, the right to a fair trial requires that the defendant be given an adequate and proper opportunity to challenge and question a witness against him or her, either when the statements were made or at a later stage of the proceedings (see Saïdi v. France, 20 September 1993, § 43, Series A no. 261-C, and A.M. v. Italy, no. 37019/97, § 25, ECHR 1999-IX).
• EGMR, 20.01.2005 - 30598/02

  ACCARDI ET AUTRES c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  Furthermore, as the witnesses" statements to the investigator were not recorded on video, neither the applicant nor the jury was able to observe their demeanour under questioning and thus form their own impression of their reliability (see, a contrario, Accardi and Others v. Italy (dec.), no. 30598/02, ECHR 2005-II).
• EGMR, 14.01.2010 - 23610/03

  MELNIKOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.04.2012 - 1413/05

  Firstly, the Court reiterates that the very fact of the participation of an accused person in confrontation interviews with witnesses during the pre-trial stage cannot of itself strip him or her of the right to have those witnesses examined in court (see Melnikov v. Russia, no. 23610/03, §§ 79-81, 14 January 2010).