Article 6 - right to a fair trial

Question 1

what is article 6

Answer 1

the right to a fair trial

Question 2

SUMMARY of article 6

Answer 2

• A6(1) - fair, public hearing withing a reasonable time by an independant and impartial tribunal
• A6(2) - pressumption of innocence until proven guilty
• A6(3)(a) - language they understand
• A6(3)(b) - adequate time and facilties to form a defence
• A6(3)(c) - defend yourself or legal assistance
• A6(3)(d) - witness examined
• A6(3)(e) - free interpreter in court if needed

Question 3

additional applied rights

Answer 3

• not to incriminate oneself
• access to a court
• equality of arms

Question 4

restrictions in the UK

Answer 4

• virtually non expect;
• limitations on when an action can be brought (there is a 3 year limit period of personal injury)
• restriction can be imposed by the judge on who brings a claim (vexatious litigations)
• judges themselves have immunity of suit - osman v UK
• teenage boy stalked by teacher at school, police let suspect go twice even after he admitted he loved the boy
• teacher shot up house and dad died - succesfully sued the police

Question 5

A6(1)

Answer 5

• in a trials there is an entitlement to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independant and impartial tribunal
• in criminal and civil

Question 6

A6(1) - a fair hearning

A6(1) - a fair hearning

Answer 6

• not defined in article
• it includes;
• equality of arms
• presumption of innocence
• no self incrimination
• access to court

Question 7

equality of arms

A6(1) - a fair hearning

Answer 7

• a balance between both parties
• defences must be properly prepared
• prosecution must disloce evidence
• steel and morris v uk - mcdonals sued claimant but C had no lawyer or legal aid , found there was a biased against him

Question 8

presumption of innocence

A6(1) - a fair hearning

Answer 8

• also mentioned in A6(2)
• salabiakv v france - right to silence
• saunders v uk
• murray v uk
• condron v uk

Question 9

no self incrimination

A6(1) - a fair hearning

Answer 9

• obtaining confession by force is a breach
• brown v stott - used forced self incrimination , had to pursue legitimate aim (finding out who comitted a crime) , exeption

Question 10

access to court

A6(1) - a fair hearning

Answer 10

• children
• T & V v UK - tied child to traintrack (killed and tortured)
• tried in an adult court
• children should be tried in child court
• witnessses child - beforehand or videos

Question 11

A6(1) - a public hearing

A6(1) - a fair hearing

Answer 11

• decision maker must have regard to the arguments and evidence of both parties before coming to a decision
• this should be done oral hearning if nessecary in person
• “justice is being seen to be done”
• stransbury v datapulse and troy holdings - tribunal - person was asleep on the pannel - not oral/public if not heard
• r v incedal - exception - terrosism, allowed to be partly in secret but some public
• B and P v UK - family court held in private - seen as a breach
• there are some exclusion to press and public which is allowed

Question 12

A6(1) - reasonable time

Answer 12

• public confidence
• as soon as possible
• robins v uk - 4 years for civil case is too long

Question 13

A6(1) - independant and impartial tribunal (judge , jury and mag)

Answer 13

• to prevent prejudice or boas
• if doesnt happen in civil HR - will get damages
• if doesnt happen in criminal HR - quashed or retrial
• E.G a judge has personal interest in the case - pinochet
• E.G jury has been tampered with twomey - after 4 attempts decided to have no jury as it was knobbeled each time

Question 14

A6 - reprensentation

Answer 14

• there is absolute no right to a lawyer - as long as it is still fair , the right wont be infringed
• legal aird
• special advocate - can be appointed to represent the person interest - pedo or terrosism
• benham v Uk - establishes not having legal aid is fine if it makes it fair still
• home secretary v AF - it is a breach to hold someone under a control order without sufficent infomation

Question 15

A6 - evidence

Answer 15

• under s.76 pace the court has the power to excludde evidence which they consider woild make the case unfair
• E.G - evidence obtained by fraud , or hearsay or torture - ags ref - undercover police asked for drugs , ruined operation
• the d has the right to attent in person but does not have to
• in criminal - the judge can choose if fair to carry on
• in civil - have to relay if one party cant attend

Question 16

reasons for decision

Answer 16

• the final judgement of a court always has reasons for decision
• the appeal court can then work out how they got to that
• once decision is reached and all apeal exhausated then close case
• brumarescu v romania - decided to reopen case that was closed to change decision , not okay

Question 17

A6(2) - presumption of innocence (criminal)

Answer 17

• right to silence (doesn’t incriminate you)
• the prosecution must prove guilty beyond any reasonable doubt
• a breach doesnt automatically make convition unsafe
• salabiaka v france - ruled strict liability drug offence doesnt go against A6 as defence available so not automatically guilty
• condron v UK - judge told jury to use silence of D against them - vio
• murray v UK - took silence as bad thing , not vio as the facts needed explaining
• saunders v uk - used silence against them

Question 18

A6(3) - minimum rights of accused in criminal cases

Answer 18

• (a) - informed of accusation promtly in language they understand
• (b) - D has adequate time to prepare defence
• (c) - legal assistance or reprosent self
• (d) - right to examine witness and have them give evidence
• (e) - free interprator if needed
• terroists dont neccesaryly get the same legal assistance rights - safety interview
• ibrahim v uk - refused legal assistance - no breach terroism
• R v Davis - went to far to protect witnesses and it messed the case
• othman (abu quata) v UK - couldnt deport because they would have been tortured
• r v incedal - half private , half public

Question 19

evaluations - well protected

Answer 19

• right to legal assistance - steel and morris
• justice must be seen to be done , impartial tribunals (pinochet)
• clear rules for evidence in cirminal trials e.g no self incrimination brown v stott , no entrapment Ag ref , evidence available for both parties with adeqaute evidence
• children held in child court - t and v
• police now dont have immunity from suit (osman)

Question 20

evaluation - not well protected

Answer 20

• Cuts to legal aid (not available in most civil cases, means tested), and only an implied right so not guaranteed.
• Twomey - no jury, Northern Irish terror trials have no juries
• Brown v Stott did allow evidence from her self incrimination due to public interest. Terror restrictions (Ibrahim - didn’t see evidence)
• Lots of children’s cases are still heard in adult Crown courts especially for indictable offences.
• You can’t sue a judge… restriction on who you can take to trial (but you can sue the MOJ…)