Published on 15 July 2025
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 1877/25
Kyrylo PIDHAINYI
against the Czech Republic
lodged on 9 January 2025
communicated on 23 June 2025
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns criminal proceedings in which the applicant, a Ukrainian national residing in the Czech Republic, was found guilty of forging his driver’s licence. He was sentenced to twenty months of suspended imprisonment and a twelve-month driving ban.
The applicant, who was not represented by a lawyer, signed a waiver of his right to an interpreter for the purposes of simplified proceedings without an oral hearing before the judge (zkrácené přípravné řízení). The waiver was written in the Czech language and as a result of it, the final decision (trestní příkaz) was also served on him only in Czech. His constitutional appeal alleging a denial of a fair trial because he did not understand the waiver nor the decision in Czech was dismissed as manifestly ill-founded by the Constitutional Court decision no. II. ÚS 1606/24 delivered to the applicant on 16 September 2024.
Relying on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (e) of the Convention, the applicant complains that his right to a fair trial was breached as a result of being deprived of an interpreter following his signature of a waiver which he did not understand. He asserts that because he did not understand the proceedings, he was deprived of an opportunity to appeal the decision and demand a full trial with an oral hearing before the judge.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
Were the criminal proceedings against the applicant fair as a whole, as required by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (e) of the Convention (see Baytar v. Turkey, no. 45440/04, §§ 46-59, 14 October 2014, and Cuscani v. the United Kingdom, no. 32771/96, §§ 38-40, 24 September 2002)? In particular, was the waiver of the right to interpretation signed by the applicant knowing and intelligent (see Vizgirda v. Slovenia, no. 59868/08, § 87, 28 August 2018)?