Communication from Armenia concerning the case of Gabrielyan against Armenia (Application No. 8088/05). * * * * * * * * * * *



Similar documents
The technical and legal obstacles to the use of videoconferencing

The Law Commission BAIL AND THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. (LAW COM No 269)

Section 17: Offenses against the Administration of Justice

LAW ON MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS

Italy. However, Italian law does contain references to videoconferencing.

Federal Act on Data Protection (FADP) Aim, Scope and Definitions

VERŻJONI ELETTRONIKA. A Bill entitled

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AMENDMENT BILL

Rules for Bankruptcy Cases, B.E (1999) Translation

Naime Ahmeti A DEFENDANT RIGHTS OF THE DEFENDANT IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

LR Case management pilot program for criminal cases. A. Scope; application. This is a special pilot rule governing time limits for criminal

The Criminal Procedure Rules Part 17 as in force on 2 February 2015 PART 17 EXTRADITION

Council of the European Union Brussels, 12 September 2014 (OR. en)

ATTORNEY GENERAL S GUIDELINES ON PLEA DISCUSSIONS IN CASES OF SERIOUS OR COMPLEX FRAUD

A Working Protocol between ACPO, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Her Majesty s Court & Tribunals Service (HMCTS), the Witness

PART 50 BEHAVIOUR ORDERS

Act on Regulation of Transmission of Specified Electronic Mail ( Act No. 26 of April 17, 2002)

Bill C-20 An act to amend the Criminal Code (Protection of children and other vulnerable persons) and the Canada Evidence Act

ON CIRCULATION OF CREDIT INFORMATION AND ACTIVITIES OF CREDIT BUREAUS THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA LAW

Court Record Access Policy

Council of the European Union Brussels, 29 May 2015 (OR. en)

HUDOC: List of Keywords Article by Article

Any civil action exempt from arbitration by action of a presiding judge under ORS

Protocol No. 14 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, amending the control system of the Convention

Crimes (Serious Sex Offenders) Act 2006 No 7

HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW CONFÉRENCE DE LA HAYE DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL PRIVÉ

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 29 September /09 LIMITE PI 93

14. CONVENTION ON THE SERVICE ABROAD OF JUDICIAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL DOCUMENTS IN CIVIL OR COMMERCIAL MATTERS 1. (Concluded 15 November 1965)

Expert Group Meeting on the Technical and Legal Obstacles to the Use of Videoconferencing

A. APPLICABILITY OF GUIDELINE

SECOND SECTION. CASE OF ZICHY GALÉRIA v. HUNGARY. (Application no /01) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG. 5 April 2005

Regulations of the Office of the Prosecutor ICC-BD/ Date of entry into force: 23 th April Official Journal Publication

Disclosable under FOIA 2000: Yes Author: T/CI Nick Barker Force / Organisation: BTP Date Created: May 2009 Telephone:

If the people who make the decisions are the people who will also bear the consequences of those decisions, perhaps better decisions will result.

Criminal Justice Sector and Rule of Law Working Group

Draft Resolution for the United Nations Human Rights Council 30 th Session, September 14-25, Situation of Human Rights in Venezuela

Criminal Procedure Law

FIRST SECTION. CASE OF VILBORG YRSA SIGURÐARDÓTTIR v. ICELAND. (Application no /96) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG

Act on Promotion of Information and Communication Network Utilization and Information Protection

Terms and Conditions of International Money Transfer Transactions by Card Members

Law Concerning Electronic Signatures and Certification Services (Unofficial Translation)

This English translation of the Act on Regulation of the Transmission of Specified

6. Ireland considers that no further individual measures are required.

Combating of Rape Act, No. 8 of 2000

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as amended by Protocols No. 11 and No. 14

Negotiated Relationship Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations. Preamble

Last amended by Order dated March 1, 2011; effective May 2, 2011.

THE CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS LAW (As amended, last amendment being on July 26, 2005)

THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE (PLEA NEGOTIATIONS AND AGREEMENTS) ACT

Estonie Loi sur la signature électronique Entrée en vigueur le 15 décembre 2000

REPLIES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE ON PROTECTION OF WITNESSES AND PENTITI IN RELATION TO ACTS OF TERRORISM POLAND

Chapter 153. Violations and Fines 2013 EDITION. Related Laws Page 571 (2013 Edition)

Question 5. After the trial, Attorney sent a $500 gift certificate to Doctor, with a note thanking her for recommending that Peter call him.

PROTOCOL TO THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES` RIGHTS ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES` RIGHTS

ACT ON PROMOTION OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK UTILIZATION AND INFORMATION PROTECTION, ETC. CHAPTER I GENERAL PROVISIONS

ISTANBUL ARBITRATION CENTRE ARBITRATION RULES

EFE FACT SHEET Mental Health

Terms and Conditions of International Money Transfer Transactions

Act CLXV of on Complaints and Public Interest Disclosures. 1. Complaint and public interest disclosure

PRESIDENT S DECISION No. 40. of 27 August Regarding Data Protection at the European University Institute. (EUI Data Protection Policy)

UNTAET REGULATION 2000/14 AMENDING REGULATION NO. 2000/11. After consultation in the National Consultative Council. Section 1 Amendments

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS (Practical approach to certain issues which are not regulated by law and international treaties)

General District Courts

KENTUCKY VICTIMS RIGHTS LAWS1

How To Respect Human Rights

Under the terms of Article 161c of the Constitution, the Assembly of the Republic hereby decrees the following: Chapter I GENERAL PROVISIONS

Federation of Law Societies of Canada

NC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 48 1

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE LAW

DISCLOSURE BY THE CROWN IN CRIMINAL CASES FIRST ISSUED: DECEMBER 23, 1999

COUNCIL OF EUROPE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS

ISRAEL national procedures for extradition. Department of International Affairs. Tel: +972-(0) Fax: +972-(0) / +972-(0)

P R O T O C O L. The State Attorney's Office of the Republic of Croatia and the Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereinafter: Parties)

AN BILLE UM CHIONTÓIRÍ A ATHSHLÁNÚ 2007 REHABILITATION OF OFFENDERS BILL Mar a tionscnaíodh As initiated ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS

Turkish Juvenile Justice System

Witness Protection Act 1995 No 87

CODE OF LAW PRACTICE Royal Decree No. (M/38) 28 Rajab 1422 [ 15-October 2001] Umm al-qura No. (3867) 17- Sha ban November 2001

RULES OFTHE COURT OF ARBITRATION IN MATTERS CONCERNING INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES AT THE POLISH CHAMBER OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY POLICE DEPARTMENT Chief David L. Perry

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE DIVISION. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) ) v. ) No. ) (Judge ) ) )

PART 37 TRIAL AND SENTENCE IN A MAGISTRATES COURT

APPEARANCE, PLEA AND WAIVER

Maricopa County Attorney s Office Adult Criminal Case Process

Public Audit (Wales) Act 2004

HP0868, LD 1187, item 1, 123rd Maine State Legislature An Act To Recoup Health Care Funds through the Maine False Claims Act

WITNESS PROTECTION ACT

INDIANA FALSE CLAIMS AND WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT. IC Chapter 5.5. False Claims and Whistleblower Protection

The Criminal Procedure Rules October 2015 PART 9 ALLOCATION AND SENDING FOR TRIAL

KYIV RECOMMENDATIONS ON JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE IN EASTERN EUROPE, SOUTH CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA

Alabama s Mandatory Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Law

A Citizen s Guide to the Criminal Justice System: From Arraignment to Appeal

Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act

First Regular Session Seventieth General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO INTRODUCED SENATE SPONSORSHIP

Terms and Conditions of International Money Transfer Transactions by Raku-Raku Members

Legal protection of victims in Germany

SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN

Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights and the Parot Doctrine

Act on Compensation for Criminal Damage

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA PROTOCOL FOR THE USE OF INTERACTIVE VIDEO CONFERENCING CIVIL

TITLE 1 INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS. Chapter 1.1 Definitions and scope

Transcription:

SECRETARIAT GENERAL SECRETARIAT OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS SECRETARIAT DU COMITE DES MINISTRES Contact: Abel Campos Tel: 03 88 41 26 48 DH-DD(2013)493 Date: 02/05/2013 Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. Meeting: 1172 DH meeting (4-6 June 2013) Item reference: Action plan (24/04/2013) Communication from Armenia concerning the case of Gabrielyan against Armenia (Application No. 8088/05). * * * * * * * * * * * Les documents distribués à la demande d un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres. Réunion : 1172 réunion DH (4-6 juin 2013) Référence du point : Plan d'action Communication de l Arménie relative à l affaire Gabrielyan contre Arménie (requête n 8088/05) (anglais uniquement)

ACTION PLAN GABRIELYAN v. ARMENIA (Application no. 8088/05, Judgment of 10/04/2012) INTRODUCTORY CASE SUMMARY The case of Gabrielyan concerns a restriction of the applicant s right to examine witnesses against him. The testimonies in question had played a decisive role in securing the applicant s conviction. The applicant was imposed a one year suspended sentence and was released under a written undertaking not to leave his place of residence. In particular the case concerned Article 6 3 (d) taken together with Article 6 1. I. INDIVIDUAL MEASURES In its judgment, the European Court of Human Rights held that the Armenian Government was to pay the applicant EUR 4,100 (four thousand and one hundred Euros) for non-pecuniary damages and costs and expenses plus any tax that may be chargeable to be converted into Armenian drams at the rate applicable at the date of settlement. Payment of just satisfaction Details of just satisfaction Non-pecuniary damage costs and expenses Total Paid on 28/09/2012 2,500 Euros 1,600 Euros 4,100 Euros The Court considered no other individual measure necessary. II. GENERAL MEASURES The Government would like to mention in particular the following general measures that have been introduced: a) Dissemination of information about the judgment The judgment was translated into Armenian and published on the official website of the Ministry of Justice on 8 April 2013. The relevant authorities involved in the case were duly informed about the judgment and provided with the translation. It was also respectively disseminated. A study of the European Court of Human Rights case-law, and the Gabrielyan case in particular, is included in the training curriculum of the Police Academy, the Prosecutors School, and the Judicial School, Public Service Training Courses as well as in the trainings organized for the staff of the detention facilities. b) Legislative measures The Government submits that the testimonial proceedings within Criminal Procedure are in the stage of structural improvements. New Draft Criminal Procedural Code has been developed by the working group of the Ministry of Justice with the support of international partners (OSCE ODIHR, GIZ, U.S. Embassy). Some provisions were drafted taking into account the violation found in Gabrielyan case. New approaches has been developed which provide more guarantees while taking testimonies and evidence. Relevant legal provisions in details are prescribed in the new draft Code of Criminal Procedure. 1

Firstly, a new mechanism (Chapter 42 titled Judicial Deposition of Testimony ) is designed to guarantee during pretrial stage the right to confrontation (cross-examination) under Article 6 3 (d) of the Convention (see Annex 1). Secondly, a special mechanism is designed for protection of vulnerable witnesses without harming right right to confrontation (cross-examination) under Article 6 3 (d) of the Convention (see Annex 2). Thirdly, there are certain improvements in regard with disclosure of pre-trial evidence during trial. In particular, Article 336 of the Draft stipulates that pre-trial testimony can be disclosed and used as evidence during trial in very limited occasions, in particular: (a) the person s Testimony was deposited during the Pre-Trial Proceedings in accordance with the requirements of this Code; (b) there is a material inconsistency between the person s Testimony given in Court and his past Testimony; (c) Exercising his constitutional right, the Accused has not declared that he wishes to give Testimony before Court; (d) the Witness or Victim has unlawfully refused to give Testimony before Court; or (e) the person has deceased, and there was no reasonable necessity of depositing such person s Testimony during the Pre-Trial Proceedings due to a grave illness (see Annex 3). All the relevant amendments have been duly discussed during the drafting procedure and particular attention was given to the case-law of ECtHR and cases v. Armenia. The aim of the relevant provisions was to prevent further possible violations which could be derived because of lack of such legal mechanisms in the Armenian legal system. The final draft is due to examination by the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia this year and is planned to enter into force in 2014. Any further development or amendment concerning these legal provisions would be submitted in due time. 2

Annex 1 CHAPTER 42. JUDICIAL DEPOSITION OF TESTIMONY Article 312. Scope of the Judicial Safeguard of Deposition of Testimony The judicial deposition of Testimony shall be performed: a. For the purpose of securing the propriety of the confession Testimony of an, by Petition of an Investigator; or b. For the purpose of obtaining proper Testimony from a person who is unable to attend the Court examination or if there is a reasonable presumption that he will lawfully not give Testimony during the Court examination, by Petition of an Investigator or a Private Participant in the Proceedings. Article 313. Petition on Deposition of Testimony 1. The Petition on deposition of Testimony shall contain the justifications of its necessity, as well as information on such Participants in the Proceedings, whose participation in the deposition is necessary. 2. Materials, which will enable the participants in the deposition to properly exercise their right of cross-questioning, shall be annexed to the Petition. 3. The Court shall render a decision to reject a Petition on deposition of Testimony, if it is not justified, or if its justifications are not convincing. Article 314. Decision to Perform Deposition of Testimony 1. If the Petition on deposition of Testimony is granted, the Court shall render a decision to perform deposition of Testimony, which shall specify the Participant in the Proceedings, which filed such Petition, the name of the person invited to give Testimony, and the place, date, and time of the deposition. 2. The deposition of Testimony shall be scheduled within a reasonable time period, but not later than 10 days, after the rendering of the decision envisaged by Paragraph 1 of this Article. 3. In case of deposition of the Testimony envisaged by Paragraph 2 of Article 312 of this Code, the Court shall determine the date of deposition taking into consideration the time that the Participants in the Proceedings need to prepare for the cross-questioning. 3

4. The decision to perform deposition of Testimony shall be immediately sent to the person who filed the Petition, as well as to such Participants in the Proceedings, whose participation in the deposition is necessary. The materials envisaged by Paragraph 2 of Article 313 of this Code, too, shall be sent to such Participants. Article 315. Procedure of Deposition of Testimony 1. The deposition of Testimony shall be performed in a Court session, in compliance with the requirements of Section 8 of this Code, mutatis mutandis. 2. The failure of a Participant in the Proceedings, who was duly notified, to attend shall not be an obstacle to performing judicial deposition. 3. The Court shall ensure compliance with the questioning procedure stipulated by this Code, as well as the exercise of the right of cross-questioning during the deposition of Testimony. The Court may not pose substantive questions during the deposition. 4. If an Accused has no Defender, the Court shall be obliged to explain his rights to him separately, including the right to give Testimony in the presence of a Defender. If the Accused expresses a wish to give Testimony in the presence of a Defender, the Court session shall be postponed for a reasonable time period. 5. As a result of deposition of Testimony, a questioning Protocol shall be prepared in compliance with the relevant requirements of this Code, which shall be signed by the participants in the deposition, and the presiding Judge shall confirm it with his seal. 4

Annex 2 Article 333. Special Procedure of Questioning 1. In exceptional cases when the presence of the person subject to questioning in Court is impossible or can undermine such person s security or the credibility of the Testimony, or when it is necessary to protect the legitimate interests of a minor Victim or witness, the Court may, based on a Party s Petition or at its initiative, perform the questioning using technical means of telecommunication (video conferencing). 2. The ability of the Participants in the Court Proceedings and the testifying person who is located elsewhere to hear and see each other clearly shall be safeguarded during any questioning performed by video conferencing. 3. At the location of the questioned person, the questioning by video conferencing shall be secured by a person chosen by the Court. 4. Before starting the questioning by video conferencing, the presiding Judge shall announce: c. The date and time of performing the questioning, as well as information about the proceedings in the framework of which such questioning is performed; d. The whereabouts of the questioned person, unless disclosing such information can undermine the security of the questioned person; e. The name, patronymic, surname, status, and whereabouts of the questioned person, f. The name and surname of the official securing the performance of the questioning; and g. The technical means used during the questioning. 5. After completing the questioning under a special procedure, the presiding Judge shall ask the Parties whether they have any Objections regarding the course or manner of performing the questioning. 6. An electronic medium of the video recording of the questioning performed by video conferencing shall be annexed to the Court session Protocol. 5

Annex 3 Article 333. Special Procedure of Questioning 1. Disclosure of Testimony given during the Pre-Trial Proceedings or in Court by Petition of a Party and based upon the Court s decision in compliance with the requirements prescribed by this Code, as well as annexes thereto (drawings, sketches, schemes, photos, audio and video recordings, video shoots, and films) shall be permitted if: a. The person s Testimony was deposited during the Pre-Trial Proceedings in accordance with the requirements of this Code; b. There is a material inconsistency between the person s Testimony given in Court and his past Testimony; c. Exercising his constitutional right, the Accused has not declared that he wishes to give Testimony before Court; d. The Witness or Victim has unlawfully refused to give Testimony before Court; or e. The person has deceased, and there was no reasonable necessity of depositing such person s Testimony during the Pre-Trial Proceedings due to a grave illness. 2. A person s past Testimony may be disclosed only after completing his questioning in Court or confirming that such questioning is impossible. Examining annexes to the Testimony shall be prohibited prior to the disclosure of Testimony. 3. Testimony given by the Accused during the Pre-Trial Proceedings outside the deposition procedure may not be disclosed, if it was obtained in the absence of a Defender, and the Accused claimed in Court that it was erroneous. 6