Communicated on 8 September 2020
Published on 28 September 2020
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 57333/14
Ioannis BELTSIOS
against Greece
lodged on 29 July 2014
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
In 2011 a preliminary inquiry (προκαταρκτική εξέταση) was conducted during which the applicant was a suspect required to provide explanations regarding the offence of, inter alia, active bribery to the detriment of the State. Subsequently, in 2011, the applicant was charged with that criminal offence, along with others, and a main investigation that was conducted in that connection terminated in 2014.
In the meantime, in a parallel criminal investigation was conducted against other persons in relation to offences pertaining to the same facts. In 2012 charges were brought against A.T., a well-known politician, for money laundering. The first-instance hearing took place from April to October 2013 and ended by decision no. 4554/2013 of the Athens Three-Member Court of Appeal for Felonies. The applicant complains under Article 6 § 2 of the Convention that his right to be presumed innocent was breached on account of the remarks included in that decision, which was issued in proceedings to which he was not a party. He submits that his name was mentioned multiple times, attributing to him acts in respect of which charges against him remained undetermined and for which he had not yet been tried by a court.
At the stage of the main investigation against the applicant, a warrant ordering the pre-trial detention of the applicant was issued on 18 January 2014. The applicant appealed against it within five days, pursuant to Article 285 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant complains under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention that his appeal against the decision ordering his pre-trial detention was not examined speedily by the Athens Judicial Council of Misdemeanour Judges which issued its decision on the applicant’s appeal on 6 June 2014.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Is Article 6 § 2 of the Convention applicable in the circumstances of the present case (see Allen v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 25424/09, §§ 95 -102, ECHR 2013)?
In the affirmative, has there been a violation of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention on account of references to the conduct of the applicant being made by the Athens Three-Member Court of Appeal for Felonies in the criminal proceedings to which he was not a party and which ended with decision no. 4554/2013 given by that court while the proceedings against him were at the stage of the main investigation and the charges against him remained yet undetermined?
2. Did the length of the proceedings whereby the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention comply with the “speediness” requirement of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see, for example, Ilnseher v. Germany [GC], nos. 10211/12 and 27505/14, §§ 251256, 4 December 2018)?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy