CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 février 2022

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sD37F5C3B { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } Published on 28 February 2022   SECOND SECTION Application no. 67442/17 Evgheni TROCIN against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 5 September 2017 communicated on 10 February 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns alleged unfairness of criminal proceedings against the applicant. The applicant and another person were accused of committing a murder. During the investigation phase of the proceedings both of them were allegedly subjected to various forms of ill-treatment in order to make self ‑ incriminating statements. Both had similar injuries and made identical allegations about the methods of ill ‑ treatment employed, despite being held separately and having no means of communication with each other. Both of them complained about the ill ‑ treatment to the domestic authorities but without success. The applicant was the only one of them to file an application with the Court in connection with the alleged acts of ill ‑ treatment. In this connection, the Court found a breach of his rights under Article   3 of the Convention in Trocin v. the Republic of Moldova (no.   23847/19, 16   March 2021. On 4 April 2017 both the applicant and the co-accused were finally found guilty as charged and convicted. One of the main pieces of the evidence relied upon by the courts in their rulings was the co-accused person’s confession made immediately after the alleged ill-treatment took place. The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that his conviction was based on evidence obtained by means of torture.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charge(s) against him, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? In particular, did the courts rely, as proof of the applicant’s guilt, on incriminating evidence obtained through ill-treatment ( Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, §   100, 11 July 2006)?   The Government are requested to submit to the Court a full copy of the domestic case-file in the case concerning the co-accused person’s complaint about ill-treatment.