Published on 8 January 2024
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 23963/21
Oldřich KRPELÍK
against the Czech Republic
lodged on 30 April 2021
communicated on 12 December 2023
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the criminal proceedings in which the applicant was found guilty of several theft offences and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment.
During the investigation the police interviewed the applicant in the absence of a lawyer, first as a suspect and then following the bringing of charges against him. His confessions obtained by those interviews were then used to gather other evidence and subsequently relied on by the domestic courts in finding him guilty. The applicant’s constitutional appeal was dismissed as manifestly ill-founded by the Constitutional Court’s decision of 3 November 2020 (no. I. ÚS 2809/20).
Relying on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention the applicant complains that his conviction was based on his confession which had been obtained at the pre-trial stage in the absence of a lawyer, and that the lack of legal assistance at that stage was all the more serious that he was in a vulnerable position due to his mental capacity.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
Were the criminal proceedings against the applicant fair as a whole, as required by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention (see, for general principles, Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, §§ 88-93, 10 March 2009; Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, §§ 249‑274, 13 September 2016; and Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, §§ 119-150, 9 November 2018)? In particular:
(a) taking into account the circumstances of the investigation, in particular the interviews of 19 and 20 May 2016 and the subsequent gathering of evidence, was the applicant’s right to remain silent and not to incriminate himself respected?
(b) were there “compelling reasons” to justify that the applicant was not assisted by a lawyer from the moment of his first interview of 19 May 2016 or, at least, of his second interview carried out following the bringing of charges on 20 May 2016?
(c) did the domestic authorities take due account of the applicant’s vulnerability by reason of his mental capacity?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy