CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 janvier 2022

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sD00444C6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .sB1D7E0BB { width:107.34%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; border-collapse:collapse } .sC6885D7A { height:26.45pt } .s90F0735B { width:9.4%; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sA29CEA2A { width:31.88%; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sB49070D1 { width:25.16%; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s1716F223 { width:33.56%; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF36B263B { height:25.9pt } .s26CDD8C3 { width:9.4%; border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC2D57A84 { width:31.88%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5CACD8B4 { width:25.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s9C6FF97E { width:33.56%; border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2D2AB0A7 { height:12.45pt } .s2B10065C { width:9.4%; border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s66513E16 { width:31.88%; border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6A4EB58F { width:25.16%; border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s9A9C4857 { width:33.56%; border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 7 February 2022   SECOND SECTION Application no. 49015/16 Alexandru MATEI and Others against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 10 August 2016 communicated on 18 January 2022 (see list of applicants in the appendix) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns alleged unfairness of criminal proceedings against the applicants. Accused of sexual assault committed against a school mate, the applicants were acquitted at first instance on the basis, inter alia , of statements made by them, the victim and witnesses. However, they were later convicted on appeal after the Court of Appeal gave a new interpretation to those statements. The applicants complain that the proceedings were not fair because the Court of Appeal convicted them without hearing anew the statements relied upon for the purposes of the conviction. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention ( Dan v. Moldova , no. 8999/07, 5 July 2011)? APPENDIX ​ List of applicants: No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality 1. Alexandru MATEI 1996 Moldovan 2. Constantin HUŞTEI 1996 Moldovan 3. Petru NOFIT 1996 Moldovan