It was a breach of Article 5 where the judicial power was exercised by a District Attorney whose impartiality was ‘capable of appearing open to doubt’ by reason of his entitlement to intervene in the subsequent criminal proceedings as a representative of the prosecuting authority.
Judge Matscher (dissenting) took the view that at the time of taking the relevant decision the District Attorney was acting as a fully independent and impartial organ. He observed that it could perhaps be argued that at a later stage, since he had previously played a role in the investigation, the District Attorney would no longer be an independent and impartial representative of the prosecuting authority, but that ‘no provision of the Convention entitles the accused to have as ‘opponent’ an independent and impartial prosecutor’.
[1990] ECHR 25, 12794/87
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 5(1)
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Haase, Regina (on the Application of) v Independent Adjudicator and Another CA 14-Oct-2008
The appellant complained that as a prisoner he was subjected to disciplinary proceedings for refusing to co-operate with drugs tests. He said that he had not been informed that there would be a penalty if he did not comply. He now complained that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.165072
