Published on 3 August 2026
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 15997/24
Pap ŽOLT
against Serbia
lodged on 22 May 2024
communicated on 1 July 2026
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the fairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicant in which he was ultimately found guilty of unauthorised production and trafficking of narcotics (cannabis) and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment.
The applicant complains under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention about the overall fairness of the criminal proceedings in question. In particular, he alleges that his conviction was based solely or decisively on the statement made by his co-accused, whom he had been unable to examine at any stage of the proceedings. The applicant further argues that the equality of arms principle was not respected because he was unable to obtain from the criminal courts an expert’s examination of the video footage used as evidence to convict him.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charge against him, as required under Article 6 §§ 1 and/or 3 (d) of the Convention? In particular, was the principle of equality of arms respected as regards the applicant’s alleged inability to obtain from the criminal courts an expert’s examination of the video footage used as evidence against him (see, among other authorities, Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, § 140, ECHR 2005-IV, and Gaggl v. Austria, no. 63950/19, §§ 47-50, 8 November 2022, with further references)? Also, was the applicant’s conviction based solely or decisively on the statement given by his co-accused, whom he had allegedly been unable to examine at any stage of the proceedings (see Dimović v. Serbia, no. 24463/11, §§ 33-40, 28 June 2016, and Oddone and Pecci v. San Marino, nos. 26581/17 and 31024/17, §§ 88-94, 17 October 2019, with further references)?