Law and relevant articles quotations

(f) Study the text below, making sure you fully comprehend it:

Article 8. The use of the extract from the list of the telephone calls as evidence in the criminal proceedings had interfered with the applicant’s right to respect for his private life. The interception and recording of the telephone conversations had been ordered by the district court judge under the CCP and the list of calls in question had been produced at the request of the police in accordance with provisions of the CCP and of the Telecommunications Act. However, the relevant provisions had not yet entered into force at the material time. It followed that the interference observed had not been in accordance with the law.

Conclusion: violation.

NOTES

extract - выдержка, извлечение, фрагмент

to interfere - служить препятствием, мешать, быть помехой ( with )

interception - перехватывание; перехват; прослушивание (напр., телефонных разговоров); перехваченная информация, подслушанный разговор

the point in question — данный / рассматриваемый вопрос

relevant – имеющий отношение к чему-л.

to enter into force - вступать в силу

at the material time - вещественный, материальный; material world: физический (тж. в противоп. духовному )

(g) Read the text again and copy the sentences that mean the following:

1) Прослушивание и запись телефонных разговоров проводились по приказу районного судьи согласно уголовно-процессуальному праву. 2) Список указанных телефонных звонков был предоставлен на основании требования полиции и в соответствии с положениями уголовно-процессуального кодекса и закона о телекоммуникациях. 3) Однако, положения, о которых идёт речь, в то время ещё не вошли в силу.

(h) Give Russian equivalents to the following sentences:

1) The use of the extract from the list of the telephone calls as evidence in the criminal proceedings had interfered with the applicant’s right to respect for his private life. 2) It followed that the interference observed had not been in accordance with the law. 3) Conclusion: violation.

Answer the questions and make a brief summary of the text:

1) Why was the use of the extract from the list of the telephone calls as evidence wrong?

2) Why was producing of the list of calls in question at the request of the police legal?

3) Why was the interference observed not in accordance with the law?

(i) Study the text below, making sure you fully comprehend it:

The recording of a conversation using a device fitted under a person’s clothing by the police authorities and its subsequent use had also interfered with the applicant’s rights. The domestic authorities had not been clear as to the legal basis on which the recording had been made. The measure had not been governed by the law satisfying the criteria laid down by the Court’s case law, but rather by a practice which could not be regarded as a specific legal basis setting forth sufficiently precise conditions for such interference as regards the admissibility, scope, control and use of the information thus collected.

Conclusion: violation.

NOTES:

subsequent - более поздний, последующий, следующий; являющийся результатом

domestic authorities – местные власти

case law - прецедентное право

precise conditions - точно установленные, отдельно взятые; точные; определенные обстоятельства, условия

as regards - что касается, в отношении

admissibility - допустимость (напр., доказательств)

scope - границы, рамки, пределы

(j) Fill in the blanks with the appropriate words from the text:

The domestic authorities . . . . . . . . . . not been clear . . . . . . . to the legal . . . . . . . . . on which the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . had been made. . . . . . . . measure had not . . . . . . governed by the . . . . . . . . satisfying the criteria . . . . . . . . down by the . . . . . . . . . . case law, but . . . . . . . . . . . by a practice . . . . . . . . . could not be . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as a specific . . . . . . . . . . basis setting forth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . precise conditions for . . . . . . . . . . . interference as regards . . . . . . . . . admissibility, scope, control . . . . . . . . . . use of the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . thus collected.

Answer the questions and make a brief summary of the text:

1) What does the law say about using a device fitted under a person’s clothing by the police authorities?

2) What was the measure rather governed by?

3) Why could practice not be regarded as a specific legal basis setting forth sufficiently precise conditions for such interference?

(k) Study the text below, making sure you fully comprehend it:

Article 6. The applicant had been able to submit to the first-instance court, then to the High Court and to the Constitutional Court, all the observations deemed necessary concerning the recording made without his knowledge. The same arguments were valid as regards the use in evidence of the chronological list of telephone calls. The applicant had been convicted under adversarial proceedings. Moreover, the impugned recording and list had contributed , and had even been crucial, to the preparation of the City Court’s judgment, but it had not been the sole evidence on which the court had based its inner conviction. As regards the weight of the public interest in the use of such evidence to obtain the applicant’s conviction, the measure had been taken against a person who had committed a serious offence to the detriment of a third party and who had ultimately received a nine-year prison sentence. Accordingly, the use by the domestic courts of the impugned recording and the list of telephone calls had not infringed the applicant’s right to a fair trial.

Conclusion: no violation.

Article 41. Non-pecuniary damage: the finding of violations was sufficient.

NOTES:

to submit - представлять на рассмотрение

to deem - думать, мыслить, полагать, размышлять, считать

valid - действительный, имеющий силу; правомерный

adversarial - соперничающий; противостоящий (друг другу)

adversary proceedings - судопроизводство по спору между сторонами; состязательный процесс

impugn - оспаривать, опровергать; ставить под сомнение, подвергать сомнению

to the detriment of - в ущерб чему-л.

non-pecuniary damage - (невыражаемый в деньгах, неисчисляемый деньгами) неденежные/ое убытки/возмещение убытков

(l) Translate the following sentences into Russian:

1) The applicant had been able to submit to the first-instance court, then to the High Court and to the Constitutional Court, all the observations deemed necessary concerning the recording made without his knowledge. 2) Moreover, the impugned recording and list had contributed , and had even been crucial, to the preparation of the City Court’s judgment, but it had not been the sole evidence on which the court had based its inner conviction. 3) Accordingly, the use by the domestic courts of the impugned recording and the list of telephone calls had not infringed the applicant’s right to a fair trial.

(m) Give English equivalents to the following sentences:

1) Те же доводы правомерны в отношении использования хронологического списка телефонных разговоров в качестве улики. 2) Заявитель был осуждён в условиях состязательного процесса. 3) Эта мера была предпринята против человека, который совершил серьёзное преступление с ущербом для третьей стороны и который в конечном счёте был приговорён к 9 годам тюремного заключения.

Answer the questions and make a brief summary of the text:

1) What is Case III about?

2) What kind of and how many offences had been heard in courts?

3) Which of the court or judge measures were qualified as ‘violation’? Why?

4) Which of the court or judge measures were qualified as ‘no violation’? Why?

5) What was the European Court of Human Rights final decision?

6) What is your opinion about what had happened?

7) What do you think about the European Court’s conclusion?

8) What would be your final judgment if you were an EC judge?

C ASE IV

Presumption of Guilt

COUNCIL OF EUROPE. EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Information note # 95 on the case-law of the Court, March 2007, Pages 17-18.

FACTS

(a) Study the text below, making sure you fully comprehend it:

In May 1998 the applicant was convicted of numerous counts of theft, burglary and attempted burglary, deliberately handling stolen goods, and membership of a criminal gang and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment. The judgment was later quashed on appeal and the applicant acquitted of all the charges against him except for the theft of a lorry and trailer and handling. He was sentenced to 36 months’ imprisonment, part of which was suspended. However, despite having already acquitted the applicant of most of the charges, in March 2001 the Court of Appeal issued a confiscation order – amounting to roughly the equivalent of EUR 67,000 or 490 days’ detention in default – in respect of all the offences of which he had originally been convicted. It justified its decision by saying that there were strong indications that he had committed the offences. An appeal by the applicant to the Supreme Court was ultimately rejected. In 2004, he reached an agreement with the authorities allowing him to pay EUR 10,000 immediately and the remainder in monthly installments.

NOTES:

count - пункт обвинительного акта или искового заявления

detention - задержание, арест; содержание под арестом,

default – неявка в суд

to justify - оправдывать; находить оправдание; извинять; объяснять

handling - перемещение; транспортировка

to quash - аннулировать, отменять

to acquit - оправдывать ( of )

to suspend - приостанавливать; откладывать; (временно) прекращать

installment - частичный взнос; часть

(b) Read the text again and copy the sentences that mean the following:

1) В мае 1998 года заявитель был приговорён к тюремному заключению сроком на пять лет за многократные кражи, кражи со взломом, попытки краж со взломом, осознанную транспортировку украденного, участие в преступных группировках. 2) Решение суда было впоследствии аннулировано в результате апелляции, подсудимый оправдан по всем пунктам предъявленных ему обвинений, за исключением обвинения в хищении грузовика и трейлера и их использовании в качестве транспортного средства для различных перевозок. 3) Однако, в марте 2001 года апелляционный суд выдал ордер на конфискацию на сумму, по грубым подсчётам, равную примерно EUR 67 000 или 490 дней содержания в тюрьме после отбывания срока заключения в отношении всех преступлений, за которые он был первоначально осуждён.

(c) Give Russian equivalents to the following sentences:

1) He was sentenced to 36 months’ imprisonment, part of which was suspended. 2) The Court justified its decision by saying that there were strong indications that he had committed the offences. 3) An appeal by the applicant to the Supreme Court was ultimately rejected. 4) In 2004, he reached an agreement with the authorities allowing him to pay EUR 10,000 immediately and the remainder in monthly installments.

(d) Match the English expressions with their Russian equivalents in the table:

1) presumption of innocence 2) confiscation order 3) reach an agreement with 4) in detention 5) confiscation proceedings

a) в заключении b) договориться с кем-л. о чем-л. c) работа, деятельность по конфискации чего-л. d) презумпция невиновности e) ордер, разрешение на конфискацию, отчуждение

Answer the questions and make a brief summary of the text:

1) What kind of events are described in this text?

2) What do you think the law says about it?