Summary

In this article the author analyses a number of issues relating to the concept of fair trial that have arisen in proceedings of the Criminal Chamber and Constitutional Review Chamber of the Supreme Court over the past few years, and suggests a number of solutions to these problems.

The author examines the Judgment of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of 29 December 2006 in case 3-1-1-97-06, in which the Court held that the principles of rule of law and fair trial do not allow for a body conducting a criminal proceeding to knowingly and wilfully violate procedural law upon performing a procedural act, with the justification that the violation is not material. The author also analyses the Judgment of the Criminal Chamber of 14 April 2010 in case 3-1-1-119-09, in which the Court emphasised that severing criminal matters for accused persons where one or some of the accused do not agree to a settlement contravenes the law and the practice of the courts. Based on the judgment in case 3-1-1-60-10, the author questions whether an unfounded initiation of proceedings could be deemed to be a violation of the principle of a fair trial. In the opinion of the author, a trial can not be considered to be fair if it results in the aggravation of the situation of any person under trial, in the broadest sense, in appeal proceedings, where that person or the person’s defence counsel has filed the appeal. The Supreme Court has addressed these issues in cases 3-1-1-51-09 and 3-1-1-20-10.

In a separate analysis, the author also addresses the right to a trial within a reasonable time and permissible infringements of this principle, based on the conduct of the person on trial (3-1-1-43-10). The issue of surveillance activities is also addressed, which in the opinion of the author is the most worrisome issue relating to the right to a fair trial.