Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ERIK ADAMCO v. SLOVAKIA

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ADAMCO v. SLOVAKIA

  Art. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Zitiert selbst (12)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 12.11.2019 - 45084/14

  ADAMCO v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  In so far as the applicant had relied on the Court's judgment in the case of his brother (see Adamčo v. Slovakia, no. 45084/14, 12 November 2019), the Constitutional Court opined that the lower courts had assessed the accomplice evidence in its overall context and that "it was not possible to conclude that they had assessed it like any other evidence or that they had not taken into account the possible advantages gained by the cooperating witnesses".

  As that evidence came from accomplices who had been said to have obtained advantages in return for incriminating the applicant, the Court must enquire into how the applicant's objections in relation to that evidence were addressed at domestic level and whether the domestic authorities subjected the matter to an adequate degree of scrutiny (see Adamčo v. Slovakia, no. 45084/14, § 59, 12 November 2019), bearing in mind that the required intensity of such scrutiny correlates with the importance of the advantage that the accomplice obtains in return for the evidence he or she gives (see Erdem v. Germany (dec.), no. 38321/97, 9 December 1999).

• EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 54810/00

  Einsatz von Brechmitteln; Selbstbelastungsfreiheit (Schutzbereich; faires …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  While Article 6 guarantees the right to a fair hearing, it does not lay down any rules on the admissibility of evidence as such, which is primarily a matter for regulation under national law (see Schenk v. Switzerland, 12 July 1988, § 46, Series A no. 140; Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, §§ 94-96, ECHR 2006-IX; and Moreira Ferreira v. Portugal (no. 2) [GC], no. 19867/12, § 83, 11 July 2017).
• EGMR, 03.03.2016 - 7215/10

  PRADE v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  This involves an examination of the "unlawfulness" in question and, where a violation of another Convention right is concerned, the nature of the violation found (see Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 89, 10 March 2009; Lee Davies v. Belgium, no. 18704/05, § 41, 28 July 2009; and Prade v. Germany, no. 7215/10, § 33, 3 March 2016).

• EGMR, 12.07.1988 - 10862/84

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  While Article 6 guarantees the right to a fair hearing, it does not lay down any rules on the admissibility of evidence as such, which is primarily a matter for regulation under national law (see Schenk v. Switzerland, 12 July 1988, § 46, Series A no. 140; Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, §§ 94-96, ECHR 2006-IX; and Moreira Ferreira v. Portugal (no. 2) [GC], no. 19867/12, § 83, 11 July 2017).
• EGMR, 11.07.2017 - 19867/12

  FONTES MOREIRA FERREIRA c. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  While Article 6 guarantees the right to a fair hearing, it does not lay down any rules on the admissibility of evidence as such, which is primarily a matter for regulation under national law (see Schenk v. Switzerland, 12 July 1988, § 46, Series A no. 140; Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, §§ 94-96, ECHR 2006-IX; and Moreira Ferreira v. Portugal (no. 2) [GC], no. 19867/12, § 83, 11 July 2017).
• EGMR, 27.10.2020 - 29084/07

  AYETULLAH AY v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  From the perspective of the rights of the defence, issues under Article 6 may arise in terms of whether the evidence produced for or against the defendant was presented in such a way as to ensure a fair trial (see Ayetullah Ay v. Turkey, nos. 29084/07 and 1191/08, § 125, 27 October 2020, with further references).
• EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 43000/11

  HABRAN c. BELGIQUE et 1 autre requête

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  The risk that a person might be accused and tried on the basis of unverified allegations that are not necessarily disinterested must not, therefore, be underestimated (see Habran and Dalem v. Belgium, nos. 43000/11 and 49380/11, § 100, 17 January 2017).
• EGMR, 25.10.2016 - 22251/13

  BASIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  While no problem of fairness necessarily arises where the evidence obtained was unsupported by other material, it may be noted that where the evidence is very strong and there is no risk of its being unreliable, the need for supporting evidence is correspondingly weaker (see Lee Davies, cited above, § 42; Bykov, cited above, § 90; and Bašić v. Croatia, no. 22251/13, § 48, 25 October 2016).
• EGMR, 25.10.2022 - 68725/16

  XENOFONTOS v. CYPRUS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  Furthermore, the Court also reiterates that the Convention does not prohibit a domestic court from relying on incriminating testimony given by an accomplice, even if that witness has been known to move in criminal circles (see Xenofontos and Others v. Cyprus, nos. 68725/16, 74339/16 and 74359/16, §§ 77 and 79, 25 October 2022, with further references).
• EGMR, 28.07.2009 - 18704/05

  LEE DAVIES c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2023 - 19990/20

  This involves an examination of the "unlawfulness" in question and, where a violation of another Convention right is concerned, the nature of the violation found (see Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 89, 10 March 2009; Lee Davies v. Belgium, no. 18704/05, § 41, 28 July 2009; and Prade v. Germany, no. 7215/10, § 33, 3 March 2016).
• EGMR, 17.12.2013 - 30164/04

  [ENG]
• EGMR - 29384/12 (anhängig)

  CIERNY v. SLOVAKIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 16.10.2025 - 48303/21

  FAJSTAVR v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Rn. 41 Referring to the general principles set out in Xenofontos and Others v. Cyprus (nos. 8725/16, 74339/16 and 74359/16, 25 October 2022), the Government submitted that the present case had to be distinguished from those in which the Court had found a violation of Article 6 (see Adamčo v. Slovakia, no. 45084/14, § 71, 12 November 2019, and Erik Adamčo v. Slovakia, no. 19990/20, § 76, 1 June 2023), in which the cooperating accused had practically been granted immunity.
• EGMR - 4641/23 (anhängig)

  GURGENIDZE v. GEORGIA

  Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against him, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, given that he was apparently convicted solely on the basis of a statement given by an individual who appears to have entered into a plea-bargain agreement with the prosecution (see Habran and Dalem v. Belgium, nos. 43000/11 and 49380/11, § 100, 17 January 2017, with further references therein; Adamčo v. Slovakia, no. 45084/14, § 59, 12 November 2019; and Erik Adamčo v. Slovakia, no. 19990/20, §§ 59 and 62, 1 June 2023; compare and contrast, Pirtskhalava and Tsaadze v. Georgia, no. 29714/18, §§ 59-61, 23 March 2023)?.
• EGMR - 27714/22 (anhängig)

  SALINGER v. SLOVAKIA and 1 other application

  (d) Was the use of that evidence at the trial accompanied by appropriate safeguards so as to ensure the overall fairness of the proceedings? In particular, is there any statutory framework or established practice in relation to matters such as immunity for cooperating witnesses and judicial control over these matters (see Erik Adamčo v. Slovakia, no. 19990/20, § 75, 1 June 2023)?.