CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 30 septembre 2004

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 65 June 2004 Balliu v. Albania (dec.) - 74727/01 Decision 30.9.2004 [Section III] Article 6 Article 6-3-c Defence through legal assistance Absence of defence lawyer for certain parts of trial: admissible The applicant, who was charged, inter alia , with murder and being the creator/participator of an armed gang, was tried on these counts in the District Court and sentenced to life imprisonment. He maintains that during the criminal proceedings his lawyer did not represent him for a period of over two months. In the hearings which took place during that time the prosecutor had summoned and questioned witnesses against the applicant. Likewise, the applicant alleges that he had no defence counsel when the parties made their final submissions. The Government maintain that the applicant’s lawyer was absent from seven consecutive hearings without giving any reasons. The applicant had been offered a court- appointed lawyer but had refused this possibility. The proceedings had therefore continued with the presence of the applicant but without any defence lawyer. The applicant’s appeals on the grounds that he had been denied a fair trial in breach of his right to be assisted by a lawyer and to summon defence witnesses were rejected. The Supreme Court held that the alleged violations had not had a significant influence on the substance of the first-instance judgment. The Constitutional Court likewise dismissed the applicant’s appeal. Admissible under Article 6.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes