CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 20 mai 2009

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s69BE285C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt } .s595A57E4 { width:85.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s64582795 { width:70.9pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sD086E7B5 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:70.9pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-70.9pt } .s3CED24E9 { width:27.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s8A3CF086 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt; font-size:13pt } .s4B4B41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt } .s8408AAD1 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .s927039E3 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt }   402 20.5.2009   Press release issued by the Registrar   GRAND CHAMBER HEARING KONONOV v. LATVIA   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Grand Chamber hearing today Wednesday 20 May 2009 at 9.15 a.m. in the case of Kononov v. Latvia (application no. 36376/04). The case concerns the applicant’s conviction in Latvia for war crimes for acts committed during World War II.   The hearing will be broadcast from 2.30 p.m. on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Summary of the facts   Vasiliy Kononov was born in Latvia in 1923. He was a Latvian national until 12 April 2000, when he was granted Russian nationality. In 1942 the applicant was called up as a soldier in the Soviet Army. In 1943 he was dropped into Belarus territory (under German occupation at the time) near the Latvian border, where he joined a Soviet commando unit composed of members of the “Red Partisans”.   According to the facts as established by the competent Latvian courts, on 27 May 1944 the applicant led a unit of Red Partisans wearing German uniforms on an expedition on the village of Mazie Bati, certain of whose inhabitants were suspected of having betrayed and turned into the Germans another group of Red Partisans. The applicant’s men burst into and searched six houses. After finding rifles and grenades supplied by the German military administration in each of the houses, the Partisans shot the six heads of family concerned. They also wounded two women. They then set fire to two houses and four people perished in the flames. In all, nine villagers were killed: six men and three women, one in the final stages of pregnancy.   According to the applicant, the victims of the attack were collaborators who had delivered a group of 12 Partisans (including two women and a small child) into the hands of the Germans some three months earlier. The applicant said that his unit had been instructed to capture those responsible so that they could be brought to trial. He had not personally led the operation or entered the village.   In January 1998 the Centre for the Documentation of the Consequences of Totalitarianism ( Totalitārisma seku dokumentēšanas centrs ) launched a criminal investigation into the events of 27 May 1944. It considered that the applicant could have committed war crimes under Article 68-3 of the former Latvian Criminal Code. Article 68-3 provided that those found guilty of war crimes were liable to between three and 15 years’ imprisonment or life imprisonment. Article 6-1 permitted the retrospective application of the criminal law with respect to war crimes and Article 45-1 provided that the prosecution of such crimes was not subject to statutory limitation.   On 2 August 1998 the applicant was charged with war crimes and on 10 October 1998 placed in pre-trial detention. He entered a not guilty plea.   The Riga Regional Court found him guilty and imposed an immediate six-year custodial sentence. That judgment was quashed on 25 April 2000 on the ground that various issues remained unresolved, including whether Mazie Bati had in fact been within “occupied territory” and whether the applicant and his victims could be classified as “combatants” and “non-combatants” respectively. The applicant was released from detention.   On 17 May 2001, following a fresh preliminary investigation, the applicant was again charged with an offence under Article   68-3.   On 3 October 2003 the Latgale Regional Court acquitted him of the war-crimes charges, but found him guilty of banditry. It accepted that the deaths of the men from Mazie Bati could be regarded as necessary and justified in military terms, but found that there was no justification for the killing of the three women or the burning down of the village buildings. The applicant and his men had committed an act of banditry and the applicant, as the commanding officer, was responsible for the actions of his unit. However, since banditry did not fall into the category of offences exempt from statutory limitation, the Regional Court relieved the applicant of criminal liability.   On 30 April 2004 the Criminal Affairs Division of the Supreme Court allowed an appeal from the prosecution and quashed that judgment, again finding the applicant guilty of war crimes under Article 68-3. Noting that he was aged, infirm and harmless, it imposed an immediate custodial sentence of one year and eight months. The applicant lodged an unsuccessful appeal on points of law.   Complaint   The applicant complains, in particular that the acts of which he had been accused had not, at the time of their commission, constituted an offence under either domestic or international law. He alleges a violation of Article 7 § 1 (no punishment without law) of the European Convention on Human Rights.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 27 August 2004.   Since the applicant is a Russian national, the Russian Government exercised their right to intervene as a third party under Article 36 § 1 of the Convention. The Lithuanian Government are also a third party, their request to intervene having been granted under Article 36 §1 of the Convention and 44 §3 (a) of the Rules of Court.   A public hearing took place in the Human Rights building, Strasbourg, on 20 September 2007 and the Chamber declared it partly admissible.   In a judgment of 24   July 2008 the Court held, by four votes to three, that there had been a violation of Article 7. Under Article 41 (just satisfaction), the Court awarded the applicant, by four votes to three, 30,000   euros   (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage.   On 26 January 2009 the case was referred to the Grand Chamber at the Government’s request.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Jean-Paul Costa (France), President , Christos Rozakis (Greece), Nicolas Bratza (the United Kingdom), Peer Lorenzen (Denmark), Françoise Tulkens (Belgium), Josep Casadevall (Andorra), Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portugal) Dean Spielmann (Luxembourg), Renate Jaeger (Germany), Sverre Erik Jebens (Norway), Dragoljub Popović (Serbia), Päivi Hirvelä (Finland), Ledi Bianku (Albania), Zdravka Kalaydjieva (Bulgaria), Mihai Poalelungi (Moldova), Nebojša Vučinić (Montenegro), judges , Alan Vaughan Lowe (Latvia) , ad hoc judge , Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska (“the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”), Vladimiro Zagrebelsky (Italy), Karel Jungwiert (the Czech Republic), substitute judges , and also Michael O’Boyle , Deputy Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Latvian Government :   Inga Reine , Agent ,   Katrina Inkuša, William Schabas , Advisers   Russian Government (Third Party):   Georgy Matyushkin , Agent ,   Nikolay Mikhaylov , Pavel Smirnov , Advisers ;   Applicant :   Mikhaïl Ioffé , Counsel ,   Marina Zakharina , Youri Larine , Advisers.     ***   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. Judgment will be delivered at a later date [1] .   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Paramy Chanthalangsy (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 28 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. [1] This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.