CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 7 février 2024

.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 } .sE207830C { margin-top:54pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } Published on 26 February 2024   SECOND SECTION Application no. 3262/22 Borislav VUKUŠIĆ against Croatia lodged on 5 January 2022 communicated on 7 February 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns criminal proceedings against the applicant in which he was found guilty of abuse of power and authority and sentenced to seven months’ imprisonment, replaced by community work. When convicting the applicant, the domestic courts relied on, inter alia , the applicant’s intercepted telephone conversations obtained in the course of the use of secret surveillance measures ordered in respect of another person. The applicant complains about the unlawful and disproportionate interference with his right to privacy in the form of secret surveillance, and about the evidence obtained thereby being used in the criminal proceedings against him. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for private life and correspondence within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention by the use of secret surveillance measures? If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article   8 §   2 (see, for instance, Dragojević v.   Croatia , no. 68955/11, §§   78 ‑ 84 and   90-101, 15 January 2015; Bašić v. Croatia , no.   22251/13, §§   32-34, 25 October 2016; Matanović v. Croatia , no. 2742/12, §§ 112-114, 4   April 2017; Grba v.   Croatia , no. 47074/12, §§ 84-87, 23 November 2017, and Bosak and   Others v. Croatia , nos. 40429/14 and 3 others, §§ 42-49, 6   June 2019)?   2.     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? In particular, did he have adequate procedural safeguards as regards the use of information obtained by secret surveillance measures as evidence in the proceedings (see, for instance, Dragojević , cited above, §§   127-135, and Bosak and Others , cited above, §§ 75-85)?