CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 14 mars 2000

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sC800182F { font-family:Arial; color:#0000ff } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s23D57171 { width:15.69pt; display:inline-block } .s38DD6A04 { width:18.2pt; display:inline-block } .sCB27B9E { width:16.66pt; display:inline-block } .sC5412BEF { width:51.05pt; display:inline-block } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   184   14.3.2000   Press release issued by the Registrar   HEARING IN THE CASE OF DAKTARAS v. LITHUANIA   Tuesday 14 March 2000 at 9 a.m.     The applicant   The case concerns an application brought by a Lithuanian national, Henrikas Daktaras, who was born in 1957 and is currently detained in the Rasų Prison in Vilnius.   Summary of the facts   The applicant is portrayed in the Lithuanian media as a mafia leader . He was found guilty on two counts of obtaining property by threats of force and inducing another to pervert the course of justice. He was sentenced to seven years and six months’ imprisonment and his property was confiscated.   Complaints   The applicant complains that the Supreme Court which examined his case at cassation instance was not an “impartial tribunal” within the meaning of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, given that it had to examine the cassation petition of the President of the Criminal Division of the Supreme Court who had expressed his opinion on the applicant’s involvement in the offences at issue and instructed the Supreme Court to uphold the judgment of the Regional Court. The President also appointed the judges who examined the case at cassation instance.   In addition, the prosecutor’s pre-trial statement that the applicant’s “guilt [was] proved” by the evidence held in the case-file is, the applicant maintains, a breach of his right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty, protected under Article 6 § 2 .   Procedure   The application was introduced before the European Commission of Human Rights on 11 May 1998 and registered on 8 July 1998. On 21 October 1998 the Commission decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government.   On 1 November 1998, the case fell to be examined by the Court, which declared the application partly admissible on 11 January 2000. Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Jean-Paul Costa (French), President , Nicolas Bratza (British), appointed to sit in respect of Lithuania , Loukis Loucaides (Cypriot), Françoise Tulkens (Belgian), Willi Fuhrmann (Austrian), Hanne Sophie Greve (Norwegian), Kristaq Traja (Albanian), Judges , Karel Jungwiert (Czech), Mindia Ugrekhelidze (Georgian), Substitute Judges. and also Sally Dollé , Section Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government:   Gintaras Švedas , Agent ; V. Milašiūtĕ, Counsel.   Applicant:   Vytautas Sviderskis , Counsel .   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private. Judgment will be delivered at a later date.   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court.