Article 243 of the Criminal Code ( Türk Ceza Kanunu ) provides:   “A President or member of a court or official body or any other public official who, in order to extract a confession of guilt

submit, first, that during the confiscation order procedure the applicant was not “charged with a criminal offence” within the meaning of Article 6 § 2, since the court was not required to determine guilt

The court referred to the strong probability of the applicant’s guilt and to the high risk of his hindering the proper conduct of the proceedings.

It noted that the applicant’s guilt was well established by the evidence in the file including the witness statements.

  Having considered all these factors, the Court concluded that the applicant's guilt had sufficiently been established on the basis of the extensive testimony given by the accused.

On the same day he acknowledged his guilt and on 3   October 2014 the case was sent for trial. 8.

Referring to Article 1070 of the Russian Civil Code, it noted that the State was only liable to compensation where a judge’s guilt had been established in a final criminal conviction.

Décision déférée à la cour : Jugement rendu le 27 Février 2013 par le Tribunal de Grande Instance de PARIS N° RG : 10/16652 Expéditions exécutoires Expéditions délivrées le : à : SCP GUEILHERS

le [Date naissance 3] 1970 à [Localité 10] de nationalité Française [Adresse 4] [Localité 9] Autre(s) qualité(s) : Appelant dans 18/04066 (Fond) Représentant : Me Alexandre OPSOMER de la SCP GUEILHERS

    Presumption of Innocence The Constitution, insofar as relevant, reads: Article 30 “Everyone is innocent as long as his guilt has not been proven by a final court decision.”

the applicant, despite dozens of investigative actions being carried out and more than seventeen people being questioned, the investigative authorities had failed to obtain sufficient evidence of his guilt

  As regards the offences as such, the Regional Court noted that the applicant had denied any guilt.

de Schepper’s record of repeated sexual offences against minors, his serious sexual perversion, risks related to alcohol abuse, his tendency to minimise his acts and his total absence of feeling of guilt

In addition, the minor-offences proceedings had been terminated as time-barred without any final decision on the attackers’ guilt.

national authorities justified his initial detention, as well as subsequent extensions, with reference only to the gravity of the charge against him, which, in his opinion, amounted to a presumption of his guilt

been “partly” discontinued and the pre-trial investigation had been adjourned because of the absence of an offence in regard to two of the charges against him, and a lack of evidence of the applicant’s guilt

Furthermore, the applicant maintains that there was a breach of Article 6 § 2 as the courts deciding on his compensation claim disregarded his acquittal and proceeded to an assessment of his guilt on the

In the eyes of the Court, such an assertion clearly showed that the judge was already convinced of the applicant's guilt, at least on one of the charges, and that she precluded the possibility of finding

associate of the former president, Mr   Shevardnadze, very well acquainted with all the flaws and weaknesses of the judicial system, the treatment during criminal proceedings, the prejudging of guilt