THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 37797/18
Denis Sergeyevich SHISHKIN
against Russia
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 10 November 2022 as a Committee composed of:
Darian Pavli, President,
Ioannis Ktistakis,
Andreas Zünd, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 July 2018,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table.
The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention concerning the unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”).
THE LAW
Complaints under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses)
The Court has carefully examined the materials in its possession and, in the light of the general principles set out in its case-law (see Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no. 9154/10, §§ 100-31, ECHR 2015), considers that the rights of the defence in the present case were not restricted to an extent incompatible with the guarantees of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention. The complaint is therefore manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Declares the application inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 1 December 2022.
Viktoriya Maradudina Darian Pavli
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention
(unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses)
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Final domestic decision
Charges convicted of
Witness absent from trial (indicated by initials)
Summary of the nature of the witness evidence
Reasons for absence
Steps taken to compensate for the witnesses’ absence
37797/18
16/07/2018
Denis Sergeyevich SHISHKIN
1983
Leninskiy District
Court of Tyumen
06/06/2018
drunk driving
Traffic police officers and attesting witnesses who took part in preparation of the administrative offence record, a medical practitioner who performed testing to determine if the applicant’s driving was impaired
The courts refused to summon witnesses referring to existence of evidence which would allow to examine the case objectively
The applicant was able to challenge the reliability of the medical reports underlying the charges against him