CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 27 août 1991

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .sC7C396CD { width:24.89pt; display:inline-block } .sE4E38D5F { width:23.77pt; display:inline-block } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. August 1991 Demicoli v. Malta - 13057/87 Judgment 27.8.1991 Article 6 Article 6-1 Criminal charge Independent tribunal Breach of privilege proceedings concerning alleged defamation of Members of House of Representatives: Article 6 § 1 applicable; violation [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.] I.   PRELIMINARY OBJECTION Government plea that application lodged out of time – applicant's position finally determined on date of sentencing, the final decision for purposes of Article   26. Conclusion : preliminary objection rejected (unanimously). II.   ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Applicability Application of the criteria laid down in the Court's established case-law in order to determine whether proceedings instituted against the applicant were criminal for the purposes of Article 6 §   1: – the definition of the offence according to the legal system of the respondent State: indication only, not decisive; – the nature of the offence itself: these particular breach of privilege proceedings did not relate to the internal regulation and orderly functioning of the House – act done outside the House by a non-Member – relevant section of the Ordinance potentially affects whole population – provides for penal sanction; – the degree of severity of penalty person concerned risked incurring: maximum penalty was imprisonment for sixty days or a fine of 500   Maltese liri or both. Conclusion : Article 6 §   1 applicable (unanimously). B.   Compliance Participation throughout proceedings of the two Members whose behaviour criticised in impugned article sufficient for impartiality of adjudicating body to appear to be open to doubt and applicant's fears in this connection justified. Not necessary to go into other aspects of Article 6 §   1. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). III.   ARTICLE 6 § 2 OF THE CONVENTION Conclusion : in light of finding of a violation of Article 6 §   1, not necessary to examine case under Article   6 §   2 (unanimously). IV.   ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Legal measures: Court not empowered to act on this request. Conclusion : claim dismissed (unanimously). B.   Damage: finding of a breach in itself adequate just satisfaction. Conclusion : claim dismissed (unanimously). C.   Costs and expenses: partial reimbursement. Conclusion : Malta to pay specified sum in respect of costs and expenses (unanimously).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes