Communicated on 23 March 2016
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 70455/10
Pellumb YZEIRAJ
against Albania
lodged on 25 November 2010
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicant, namely the lack of adequate reasons in the domestic decisions in rejecting the applicant’s alibi that he had been in Greece between 22 March and 1 April 2002 whereas the crime of which he was convicted had been committed on 25 March 2001. The applicant further complains about the domestic courts’ failure to summon and question a number of witnesses, namely Th.P and S.K who lived in Greece and could give explanations about his alibi, a medical expert who could give explanations about the ability of the sole eye-witness, B.D, to make statements after the commission of the crime, and a military expert who could reconstruct the mechanism of the commission of the crime and verify B.D’s statement.
QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES
Has there been a breach of the applicant’s rights as guaranteed by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention? In particular:
a) Did the domestic courts provide adequate reasons in rejecting the applicant’s alibi that he had been in Greece between 22 March and 1 April 2002 (the crime of which the applicant was convicted was committed on 25 March 2002)?
b) Did the domestic courts reasonably reject the applicant’s requests to summon and question witnesses Th.P and S.K who lived in Greece, a medical expert to examine the ability of B.D to make a statement at the time of the commission of the crime, as well as a military expert to examine the mechanism of the commission of the crime?
c) Was B.D induced to testify against the applicant on 24 February 2003 in exchange for the prosecutor’s promise to drop the charges against him (see Cornelis v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 994/03, 25 May 2004)?
d) Was B.D’s testimony at the hearing of 24 February 2003 coherent with the statements he had made on 10 April 2002?
e) What direct and corroborating evidence was used for the applicant’s conviction (see Pichugin v. Russia, no. 38623/03, 23 October 2012)?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy