VISIOCONFERENSING TECHNOLOGY AND THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL

VISIOCONFERENSING TECHNOLOGY AND THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL

IMPACT OF MODERN TECHNOLOGIES ON FREE MOVEMENT OF EVIDENCE IN EUROPEAN UNION

According to the estimate of the EU Commission 85 percent of criminal investigations require electronic evidence, while in almost two thirds (65 percent) of the investigations where e-evidence is relevant. Investigation and prosecution of crime increasingly relies on the possibility to have access to data held by service providers, as private company. Modern criminal investigation and use of electronic evidence imposes challenges to the right to fair trial and rule of law standards. The paper identifies benefits and challenges of proposed EU instruments for facilitating e-evidence. The European Commission proposed Regulation of Production Order and Preservation Order with the aim to facilitate access to relevant data stored by service providers. The paper recognizes shortcomings of the proposed Regulation. The biggest challenge is lack of judicial oversight of orders, as a guarantee of fair trial. The paper includes recommendations and policy options for promoting judicial system for cross border access and collection of electronic data in line with EU fundamental rights standards.

Predictive analytics in crime prevention and the European Convention on Human Rights: tackling risks in privacy and fair trial frameworks

In this paper, I discuss whether the European Convention on Human Rights provides safeguards to individuals affected by predictive analytics in crime prevention. I start with depicting a conceptual issue that worries legal scholars – the trend of law-enforcement authorities to increase their attention to crime prevention rather than traditional criminal investigations. Then, I dive into the right to privacy case-law of the European Court of Human Rights looking for the Court’s references to the threats of data processing. Lastly, I select concrete cases of the European Court of Human Rights on the right to a fair trial to show that the human rights safeguards are not yet developed to frame predictive analytics in crime prevention.

Court expert status in Poland. Flagging up the selected problems

The intent of this written presentation is to analyse the multi-faceted issue of the position and functioning of court experts in the Polish legal system. Particular attention should be paid in this respect to the appointment and verification of the competencies of candidates for experts, as well as to the instruments of control over their work. These selected aspects are extremely important, not only from the point of view of public interest, but in particular from the perspective of the party’s right to a fair trial, and to have the case heard within a reasonable time. The problems identified and briefly discussed have a structural and systemic nature, and result in arrangements which confirm the necessity for legislative changes proposed for many years, relating to court experts as well as to the practice of judicial authorities. The discussion of these issues has an informative purpose, especially for readers unfamiliar with the Polish legal system.

Criminal Liability of an Entrapped Person Through the Prism of Goals of Punishment

Present work was written as a part of doctoral research. It aims to generate reasonable arguments on whether it is just to prosecute and punish a person that was entrapped by an agent-provocateur. In other words − does criminal entrapment constitute a substantive defence for an entrapped person or not? In scientific literature the matter is traditionally discussed within the scope of criminal procedure (admissibility of evidence, fair trial etc.) while arguments from substantive criminal law are rarely addressed. Thus, it remains un- clear whether the goals of punishment are achievable at all if an entrapped person gets sentenced. Thus, it is necessary to compre- hend the subject through the prism of goals of punishment name- ly: restoration of justice, special prevention of crime and general prevention of crime especially since all three are well-recognised by science of criminal law and current legislation. After detailed and consistent analysis done within research, there are good rea- sons to conclude that prosecution and following sentencing of an entrapped person: • Hinders restoration of justice • Hinders special prevention of crime • Partially hinders general prevention • Eventually, all that constitutes an important argument to consider entrapment as a substantive defence for the entrapped person.

Interstate Application on Behalf of Organisations Lacking Non-governmental Status is Inadmissible. Comment on ECtHR Decision in Slovenia v. Croatia (Application No. 54155/16)

The present commentary concerns the claims alleging a violation under Article 6(1) (right to a fair trial), Article 14 (Prohibition of Discrimination) and Article 13 (Right to an Effective Remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (Peaceful Enjoyment of Possessions) to the European Conventionon Human Rights by preventing Ljubljana Bank (a Slovenian bank) from enforcing and collecting the debts of its Croatian debtors in Croatia by the Croatian authorities. The case under discussion is an inter-state case and the applicant was the Republic of Slovenia. The decision is significant from the perspective of the development of case law in inter-state cases, which are still rare in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. It has been confirmed that inter-state applications are additional measures for the protection of the rights of individuals which cannot be used to protect State interests.

Right to a Fair Trial

Every year, the European Court of Human Rights delivers a large number of judgments, adding to its already extensive case-law. This makes it difficult for people outside the Court to know which cases are the most relevant and break new ground for fair trial issues. This book seeks to respond to that need by focusing on the most important cases and aims to make the content of Article 6 accessible in order to best serve readers' every-day practical legal needs The cases are selected following the Court's Jurisconsult's opinion of their jurisprudential interest. In addition, the book includes a number of other cases that raise issues of general interest, establish new principles, or develop or clarify the Court's existing case-law. The case summaries draw the readers' attention to the essential points, allowing them to focus on the jurisprudential significance of a particular case. A clear structure utilising detailed heading helps the reader to quickly find the relevant case-law. <br><br><i>Right to a Fair Trial: A Practical Guide to the Article 6 Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights</i> is a comprehensive, easy-to-use and up-to-date reference book which provides a useful source of information for the practitioners, theorists and students in the field of human rights.

ANONIMNI SVEDOCI I ZAŠTITA LjUDSKIH PRAVA

Тhe author deals with the problem of anonymous witnesses in the context of the right to a fair trial in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. One of the problems in the application of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is related to the testimonies of anonymous witnesses in criminal proceedings. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights has developed certain criteria that must be followed in national legislation, but it is obvious that there is insufficient knowledge regarding this problem, as well as the reluctance to apply the mentioned rules. The standards developed by the ECtHR are very important for national laws and jurisprudence. The author explains the development of a three-step test that needs to be examined when assessing a violation of the right to a fair trial, through an analysis of a multitude of judgments, in order to provide guidance on the application of Article 6 § 3 (d) of the European Convention on Human Rights. After introductory considerations, the author explains who can be a witness under the Convention, since this question is raised independently of national legislation, and then explains the right to examine witnesses, the admissibility of testimonies by anonymous witnesses and the examination of the three-stage test, and gives concluding remarks.

The right of the defense to request an explanation of the accusation during the criminal investigation phase

Pursuant to Article 66 paragraph (2) point 1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused has the right to know for what deed he is accused […], i.e. to be informed on the nature and cause of the accusation brought against him. If the person is not properly informed about the accusation, he is deprived of the right to ensure the possibility of preparing and exercising his defense, being seriously affected by the principles of a fair trial, guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Although the principle governing the exercise of rights by the accused in criminal proceedings guarantees the use of any means and procedures of defense, except those expressly prohibited by law, some prosecutors are reluctant to defenders’ requests to explain the accusation in criminal proceedings, context in which, in most cases, either declares them inadmissible or considers them unfounded. Such an approach does not reconcile the right to a fair trial; or, the clarity of what is set out in the indictment is also linked to the right of the accused to defend himself – as an indispensable element of the protection of the person against arbitrariness. Therefore, in this study, the authors will come up with pertinent arguments to annihilate the vicious practice of prosecutors to disregard the importance of predictability of the accusation in order to ensure the right to defense, as well as avoiding the conviction of the Republic of Moldova by the European Court for European Convention.