CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 mai 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 24 May 2018   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 46399/14 João GONÇALVES BARATA against Portugal lodged on 16 June 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the effectiveness of the applicant’s legal assistance in criminal proceedings, in which several defense lawyers asked to withdraw from the case while the time-limit to bring an appeal against his conviction expired. It raises issues under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 c) of the Convention. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Were the applicant’s rights of access to court under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and to defend himself under Article 6 § 3 c) complied with Panasenko v. Portugal, no. 10418/03, §§ 49 – 51 and 53, 22 July 2008, and Falcão dos Santos c. Portugal, no. 50002/08, § 46, 3 July 2012?   The Government are invited to provide the Court with copies of all the notifications to the applicant regarding the appointments of all his defense lawyers in the criminal proceedings.