CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 9 octobre 2023

.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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s96D82958 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 30 October 2023   FIRST SECTION Application no. 30787/18 Giorgio BARZOI against Italy lodged on 27 June 2018 communicated on 9 October 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged violation of the applicant’s right to be presumed innocent. In criminal proceedings against a third person, on charges of defamation for having stated that the applicant had committed some offences, the judge for preliminary investigations at the District Court of Verona dismissed those proceedings, stating that the facts attributed to the applicant were “true, given the conviction in first instance” against him. The applicant complains under Article 6 § 2 of the Convention that his right to be presumed innocent was not respected, arguing that the domestic court dismissed the proceedings on the assumption that the charges against him were true, notwithstanding that the criminal proceedings for the assessment of those charges were still pending.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the presumption of innocence, guaranteed by Article 6 § 2 of the Convention, respected in this case? In particular, did the statement by the judge for preliminary investigations reflect an opinion of the applicant’s guilt, notwithstanding that the parallel criminal proceedings against him on the same charges were still pending (see Diamantides v.   Greece (no.   2) , no.   71563/01, §§ 44-48, 19 May 2005)?