CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 8 juillet 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 8 July 2020 Published on 27 July 2020   FIRST SECTION Application no. 20791/19 Hrvoje ĆALUŠIĆ against Croatia lodged on 11 April 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns criminal proceedings against the applicant in which he was found guilty of forging a document and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, suspended for two years. The applicant complains, under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention, about a breach of the principle of equality of arms alleging that he was convicted on the basis of a graphological expert report which was: - obtained by the public prosecutor during the pre-trial investigation; and - drawn up by the forensics centre of the Ministry of the Interior, the body that filed the criminal complaint against him; and that the domestic courts dismissed his request for an independent expert examination. He also complains, under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention, that he was not given an opportunity to be present at the session of the appeal panel.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the domestic courts’ refusal of the applicant’s request for an independent expert examination and the fact that, as alleged by the applicant, those courts convicted him on the basis of the expert report drawn up by the Ministry of the Interior’s forensics centre obtained at the request of the public prosecutor during the pre-trial investigation in breach of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (see Stoimenov v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia , no. 17995/02, §§ 38-43, 5 April 2007)?   2.     Was the applicant’s absence from the session of the appeal panel in the criminal proceedings against him in compliance with the requirements of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention (see Zahirović v. Croatia , no.   58590/11, §§ 58-64, 25 April 2013; Arps v. Croatia , no. 23444/12, §§   24-29, 25 October 2016; and Bosak v. Croatia , no. 40429/14, §§   105 ‑ 112, 6 June 2019)?