CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 décembre 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 10 December 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 74542/12 Vasile ASIMIONESE against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 8 November 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns fairness of criminal proceedings against the applicant. Accused of fraud, the applicant was acquitted at first instance on the basis of several witness statements. However, he was convicted on appeal after the Court of Appeal gave a new interpretation to those witness statements, without hearing them in person. The applicant complains that the proceedings were not fair because the Court of Appeal convicted him without hearing anew the witnesses. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES 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 ( Dan v. Moldova , no. 8999/07, 5 July 2011)?