The claimant challenged his conviction after he had not been given access to a lawyer whilst detained and after, during the appeal process, prosecution material was submitted to the court which was not shown to him. Nevertheless he had remained silent at interview.
Held: There had been a breach of article 6(3)(c) in conjunction with article 6(1) because he did not have access to a lawyer while he was being interrogated: ‘The Court believes that equity requires of criminal proceedings in general, for the purposes of Article 6 of the Convention, that the suspect enjoys the opportunity to be assisted by a lawyer from the time of placement custody or on remand.
As highlighted the generally recognized international standards, the Court accepts that frame and its jurisprudence, an accused must, as soon as it is deprived of liberty, to benefit from the assistance of counsel and that regardless of his interrogation sudden . . Indeed, procedural fairness requires that the accused can get all the wide range of interventions that are specific to the board. In this regard, the discussion of the case, the defense organisation, the collection of evidence favorable to the accused, the preparation of interrogation, the support of the accused in distress and monitoring of prison conditions are basic elements of the defense counsel must freely exercise.’
Judges:
Francoise Tulkens, President
Citations:
7377/03, [2009] ECHR 2278
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 6
Cited by:
Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights
Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.431335
