The Impartiality of Judge and the principle of presumption of Innocence in the light of recent ECtHR Case Law

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F49777513%3A23320%2F22%3A43967191" target="_blank" >RIV/49777513:23320/22:43967191 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://rozkotova.cld.bz/CYIL-vol-13-2022/144/" target="_blank" >https://rozkotova.cld.bz/CYIL-vol-13-2022/144/</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

The Impartiality of Judge and the principle of presumption of Innocence in the light of recent ECtHR Case Law

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Th is study takes a closer look at the principles of impartiality of judges and the principle of presumption of innocence on the background of the recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the ECtHR”). Specifi cally, it is a detailed analysis of the judgment in the case known as Mucha v. Slovakia,1 where, in the proceedings preceding that judgment, the ECtHR found a violation of Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the “ECHR”) in relation to the complainant, who had been sentenced to a long term of imprisonment by the same court (a Chamber of the national court) which had previously approved a plea bargain with the other accomplices of the complainant. In the ECtHR’s view, the convictions which pproved the plea bargains with all the complainant’s co-perpetrators raised serious doubts about the impartiality of the court (i.e., the decision-making Chamber). Th e ECtHR was thus partly inspired by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which raises the question whether this judgment will be confi rmed by the case-law of other European courts or not. Th is fact could result in a future change of the criminal procedure rules regarding the exclusion of judges from deciding in similar cases. Th e analysis of such a judgment is important not only for Slovak and Czech legal doctrine and practice, which are very similar for historical reasons, but also for the rules of criminal procedure in other countries of the Council of Europe and the European Union. At the same time, thanks to the judgment which is subject to the analysis, it is necessary to point out the prevailing mutual respect between the two European courts in terms of the results of their decisionmaking activities.

Název v anglickém jazyce

The Impartiality of Judge and the principle of presumption of Innocence in the light of recent ECtHR Case Law

Popis výsledku anglicky

Th is study takes a closer look at the principles of impartiality of judges and the principle of presumption of innocence on the background of the recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the ECtHR”). Specifi cally, it is a detailed analysis of the judgment in the case known as Mucha v. Slovakia,1 where, in the proceedings preceding that judgment, the ECtHR found a violation of Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the “ECHR”) in relation to the complainant, who had been sentenced to a long term of imprisonment by the same court (a Chamber of the national court) which had previously approved a plea bargain with the other accomplices of the complainant. In the ECtHR’s view, the convictions which pproved the plea bargains with all the complainant’s co-perpetrators raised serious doubts about the impartiality of the court (i.e., the decision-making Chamber). Th e ECtHR was thus partly inspired by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which raises the question whether this judgment will be confi rmed by the case-law of other European courts or not. Th is fact could result in a future change of the criminal procedure rules regarding the exclusion of judges from deciding in similar cases. Th e analysis of such a judgment is important not only for Slovak and Czech legal doctrine and practice, which are very similar for historical reasons, but also for the rules of criminal procedure in other countries of the Council of Europe and the European Union. At the same time, thanks to the judgment which is subject to the analysis, it is necessary to point out the prevailing mutual respect between the two European courts in terms of the results of their decisionmaking activities.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Czech Yearbook of Public &amp; Private International Law

ISSN

1805-0565

e-ISSN

1805-0999

Svazek periodika

13

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

13

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

15

Strana od-do

144-158

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85168489146