CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 31 mars 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 19 April 2021   THIRD SECTION Application no. 2514/21 Aleksandr Anatolyevich KITBALYAN against Russia lodged on 7 December 2020 communicated on 31 March 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The present case concerns the applicant’s conviction for large-scale fraud committed through abuse of authority. Referring to Article   6   §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention, the applicant argues that he was unable to obtain attendance and examination of five defence witnesses and that his relevant motions were not properly examined by domestic courts. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     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? In particular, was the right to obtain the attendance and examination of defence witnesses violated?   2.     Was the applicant’s request to examine defence witnesses sufficiently reasoned and relevant to the subject matter of the accusation?   3.     Did the domestic courts consider the relevance of that testimony and provide sufficient reasons for their decision not to examine witnesses at the trial?   4.     Did the domestic courts ensure the overall fairness of the proceedings as guaranteed by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3(d) of the Convention?