CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 juin 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }   Communicated on 23 June 2016   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 59090/12 Hakimeldostu MEHDIYEV against Azerbaijan lodged on 26 July 2012 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Hakimeldostu Mehdiyev, is an Azerbaijani national, who was born in 1961 and lives in Nakhchivan. He is represented before the Court by Mr R. Mustafazade and Mr A. Mustafayev, lawyers practising in Sumgayit. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. The applicant was a reporter for an opposition newspaper in the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic. On an unspecified day in January 2010 he opened a carwash facility next to his house. On 13 July 2011 representatives of the Sharur District Electricity Network inspected the electricity usage in the carwash facility and found that the applicant had unlawfully connected his facility to the main electricity line and had been using electricity without paying for it. On an unspecified date criminal proceedings were instituted against the applicant and he was charged under Article 189-1.1 (unlawful consumption of electricity causing serious damage) of the Criminal Code. The total amount of damage caused was determined by an expert at 1,050.18 Azerbaijani Manats (AZN) (approximately EUR 977). The calculation was based on the assumption that on average fifteen cars were washed in the facility per day. During the trial ten witnesses stated that whenever they passed by the facility or had their cars washed there, they had seen three or four cars queuing to be washed. The applicant’s son testified that only a few cars – a maximum of six – had been washed in the facility per day. The applicant requested the attendance of four witnesses (apparently some customers of the facility) who would have testified in his favour that the number of cars actually washed in the facility per day was much lower. The court dismissed his request without providing any reasons. On 23 September 2011 the Sharur District Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to a fine in the amount of AZN 1,000 (approximately EUR 930). The applicant challenged the judgment. On 10 November 2011 the Supreme Court of the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic upheld the judgment. It was further upheld on 22 February 2012 by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Azerbaijan. COMPLAINT The applicant complains, under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention, of the unfairness of the criminal proceedings against him on account of his inability to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf, and the manner in which the amount of damage caused by the allegedly unlawful consumption of electricity was established.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against him, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was he able to obtain the attendance of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him, as required by Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention?   2.     The Government are requested to submit copies of all the relevant documents concerning the applicant’s case.