CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 22 novembre 2017

.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 }   Communicated on 22 November 2017   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 36190/10 Vitaliy Grigoryevich MASAKOVSKIY against Ukraine lodged on 30 May 2010 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Vitaliy Grigoryevich Masakovskiy, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1983. He is currently serving a prison sentence in Luhansk. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 30 December 2008 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of robbery. In the course of a pre-trial investigation, additional charges were brought against him. On 2 January 2009 he was remanded in custody. On 22 December 2009 the Kharkiv Regional Court of Appeal, sitting as a court of first instance, found the applicant guilty of two counts of robbery and attempted murder and sentenced him to fifteen years’ imprisonment. He did not attend the hearing but his lawyer was present. On unspecified date the applicant and his lawyer appealed in cassation. Despite acknowledging his guilt in the robberies, the applicant denied that he had intended to kill the victim. On 9 March 2001 he submitted a request to participate in the cassation hearing in person. On 18 May 2010 the Supreme Court of Ukraine upheld the judgment of the first-instance court. The applicant did not attend the hearing but his lawyer, the prosecutor and the victim were present. The ruling of the Supreme Court did not mention the applicant’s request to participate in the hearing. The case file as it stands does not contain any decision of the court in that regard, and it is not known whether such a decision was taken at all. B.     Relevant domestic law The relevant provisions of domestic law can be found in the Court’s judgment in the case of Sobko v. Ukraine (no. 15102/10, § 41, 17 December 2015). COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the cassation hearing took place in his absence. QUESTION 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 of the Convention and in the light of the procedural guarantees afforded by paragraph   3 (c) of this provision? In particular, did the interests of justice require that the applicant be present at the hearing of the Supreme Court?   The Government are requested to provide a copy of the applicant’s cassation appeal and all relevant documents, if any, concerning the examination of the applicant’s request to participate in the cassation proceeding in person.