CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 20 novembre 2008

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; 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. 113 November 2008 Işyar v. Bulgaria - 391/03 Judgment 20.11.2008 [Section V] Article 6 Article 6-3-e Free assistance of interpreter Inconsistencies in the Supreme Court's case-law on the payment of the interpreters' fees of convicted persons: violation   Facts : The applicant, a Turkish national, is currently serving a prison sentence in Bulgaria for drug trafficking. In the course of the criminal proceedings against him, he was assisted by several interpreters remunerated by the investigating authorities and the courts. The District Court found him guilty as charged and sentenced him to 15 years’ imprisonment and a fine. It also ordered him to pay all the costs incurred during the preliminary investigation and the examination of the case at first instance. An ordinary appeal and an appeal on points of law by the applicant were dismissed and the Supreme Court of Cassation ordered him to pay the interpretation costs incurred in the proceedings before it. The applicant also complained of the poor conditions of detention in his prison, on account of overcrowding, a lack of organised activities for prisoners, deplorable standards of hygiene, lack of free access to the sanitary facilities at any time of the day and poor-quality food. . Law : Article 6 § 3 (e) – The case revealed a certain inconsistency in the case-law of the Bulgarian Supreme Court of Cassation   as to whether convicted criminals could be required to pay interpretation costs: in an identical case the same court had exempted the offender from paying interpretation costs. In the present case the manner in which the courts interpreted domestic law had resulted in the applicant being required to pay all the interpreting costs incurred in the criminal proceedings against him, which had deprived him of is right to the free assistance of an interpreter. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 3 – The applicant’s allegations concerning his conditions of detention were corroborated by other evidence in the Court’s possession, and in particular by the report on the prison concerned drawn up by the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). In view of the cumulative effect of the poor conditions of detention, and bearing in mind the length of the applicant’s detention and his particular circumstances, the applicant had been subjected to suffering beyond the inevitable level inherent in detention, which amounted to degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 3. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 41 – EUR 31 in respect of pecuniary damage, EUR 5,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.   © 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