CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 20 janvier 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sCC018295 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .s8A3CF084 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt; font-size:11pt } .s624258FB { width:17.2pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s39D67136 { width:31.88pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .sBACB86A2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sB853CD26 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } 047 20.01.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   GRAND CHAMBER HEARING SAKHNOVSKIY v. RUSSIA   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Grand Chamber hearing today Wednesday 20 January 2010 at 9.15 a.m. , in the case of Sakhnovskiy v.   Russia (application no.   21272/03).   The hearing will be broadcast from 2.30 p.m. on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   The applicant, Sergey Sakhnovskiy, is a Russian national who was born in 1979 and lived in Novosibirsk. In December 2001 he was found guilty of murdering his father and his uncle and was sentenced to eighteen years’ imprisonment. Relying on Article   6   §§   1 and   3   (c) (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights, he alleges that the criminal proceedings against him have been unfair, in particular because he has not been provided with adequate legal assistance at the hearing before the court of appeal and has been unable to conduct his defence effectively as he could only communicate with the courtroom by video link.   After communication of the application to the Russian Government, the Presidium of the Supreme Court, in a decision given on 4   July 2007 following supervisory review proceedings, quashed the appeal judgment on the ground that the applicant’s right to legal assistance had been breached. In the course of the new appeal proceedings the Supreme Court refused the applicant’s request to attend in person on the ground that his participation by video link was sufficient. A new defence lawyer was appointed by the court but was not introduced to his client until just before the hearing began. They were allowed fifteen minutes of confidential talks. The applicant objected to the appointment of the new lawyer, without success. The verdict and the sentence were upheld in substance by the Supreme Court.   Regarding the Russian Government’s argument that the applicant had lost his victim status, the Chamber, in its judgment of 5   February 2009, accepted that the quashing of the appeal judgment by the Presidium amounted to an acknowledgment that there had been a breach of Article   6 of the Convention. However, in the new appeal proceedings before the Supreme Court the applicant had not had effective representation either. Accordingly, he had not been afforded appropriate redress and could still claim to be the victim of a violation.   On 14 September 2009 the case was referred to the Grand Chamber [1] at the Government’s request.   The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Jean-Paul Costa (France), President , Nicolas Bratza (the United Kingdom), Peer Lorenzen (Denmark), Françoise Tulkens (Belgium), Josep Casadevall (Andorra), Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portugal), Boštjan M. Zupančič (Slovenia) Anatoly Kovler (Russia), Renate Jaeger (Germany), David Thór Björgvinsson (Iceland), Danutė Jočienė (Lithuania), Dragoljub Popović (Serbia), Mark Villiger (Liechtenstein), Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre (Monaco), Päivi Hirvelä (Finland), Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska (“the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”), Ledi Bianku (Albania), judges , Rait Maruste (Estonia), Ann Power (Ireland), Işıl Karakaş (Turkey), substitute judges , and also Michael O’Boyle , Deputy Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :   Nikolay Mikhaylov , Tatyana Korolkova , Yana Tsimbalova, Counsel ;   Applicant :   Karinna Moskalenko , Oxana Preobrazhenskaya , Natasha Lisman , Counsel .   ***   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. A decision will be adopted at a later date. [2]   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) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)   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] Under Article 43 of the Convention, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17 member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer. [2] This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.