Communicated on 8 October 2019
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 24654/19
Tolga ÇAKIR
against Turkey
lodged on 30 April 2019
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicant, in particular the alleged failure by the domestic courts to observe the principle of equality of arms concerning the collection and examination of evidence, including the witnesses called by the applicant during the proceedings.
The applicant, who was a lawyer at the time of the events giving rise to the present application, was convicted of embezzlement under Article 247 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to four years and two months’ imprisonment. As a result of his conviction, the applicant served part of his sentence in prison and disbarred.
The applicant complains under Article 6 §§ 1, 2 and 3 (d) of the Convention, arguing in particular that his requests for the hearing of his witnesses and the collection of evidence were dismissed by the domestic courts without providing any reason. He further argued that the domestic courts had failed to properly examine the evidence and the submissions in the case file.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against him, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?
(a) Was the principle of equality of arms respected in connection with the collection and examination of evidence? Did the domestic courts duly examine and provide reasons in respect of the applicant’s requests by which he asked them to collect and examine further evidence (see, mutatis mutandis, Murtazaliyeva v. Russia [GC], no. 36658/05, §§ 139-168, 18 December 2018, and Mirilashvili v. Russia, no. 6293/04, 11 December 2008)? In the same vein, did the domestic courts give attention to the validity, credibility or relevance of all the evidence?
(b) Was the applicant able to obtain the attendance of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him, as required by Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention (see, for instance, Murtazaliyeva v. Russia [GC], no. 36658/05, § 139-168, 18 December 2018)? Did the domestic courts provide relevant reasons for dismissing his request to call witnesses (see, for instance, Topić v. Croatia, no. 51355/10, § 42, 10 October 2013)?
The Government are further invited to submit copies of all the relevant documents concerning the criminal proceedings against the applicant, including but not limited to the minutes of all the hearings, the reasoned judgments of the trial court, evidence against the applicant and the written submissions of the applicant throughout the proceedings.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy