CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 avril 2025

.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 } Published on 19 May 2025   THIRD SECTION Application no. 54248/19 Jahangir HAJIYEV against Azerbaijan lodged on 15 October 2019 communicated on 30 April 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the criminal proceedings brought against the applicant, who is a former chairman of the executive board of the International Bank of Azerbaijan. He was charged with criminal offences under Articles 179.3.1 (embezzlement by an organised group), 179.3.2 (high ‑ level embezzlement), 308.2 (abuse of official authority entailing grave consequences), 309.2 (excess of official authority entailing grave consequences) and 313 (forgery by an official) of the Criminal Code. By a judgment of 14 October 2016 of the Baku Court of Serious Crimes, the applicant was convicted as charged and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment with a three years’ ban on holding public office. Following a series of appeals, by a final decision of 18 April 2019, the Supreme Court upheld the lower courts’ judgments. In December 2018, in a new set of criminal proceedings the applicant was charged with a number of additional criminal offences, including money laundering. He was found guilty on all charges and given an aggregate sentence of sixteen years and three months’ imprisonment with a three years’ ban on holding public office. The complaints raised in the present application do not concern that new set of proceedings. Relying on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (b) and (c) of the Convention, the applicant complains, in respect of the first set of proceedings, that he was not afforded adequate facilities for the preparation of his defence because of the conditions in the courtroom and that his confinement in a glass cabin during the trial before the first-instance court hampered his effective participation in the proceedings and ability to communicate with his lawyers. QUESTIONS 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 and 3 (b) and (c) of the Convention? In particular, was the applicant afforded adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence, as required by Article 6 § 3 (b) of the Convention? In the light of the requirements of Article 6 § 3 (c), was the applicant afforded effective participation in the proceedings as regards the right to communicate with his lawyer without the risk of being overheard by third parties during the trial (see, for example, Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no.   46221/99, § 133, ECHR 2005-IV; Insanov v. Azerbaijan , no. 16133/08, §   165, 14 March 2013; and Yaroslav Belousov v. Russia , nos. 2653/13 and   60980/14, §§ 149-52, 4 October 2016)?