The case of D. K. v. Greece. Views of the UN Human Rights Committee dated July 19, 2024. Message No. 3582/2019.
In 2019, the author was assisted in preparing a complaint. Subsequently, the complaint was communicated to Greece.
The author claimed a violation of his right to a fair trial in accordance with article 14, paragraph 1 and subparagraph 3 (b), of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights due to the incompleteness of the protocol of the criminal trial and the inability to access accurate and complete documentation reflecting the evidence presented during the trial in a timely manner. The Human Rights Committee has found a violation of article 14 of the said Covenant.
The Committee's legal position is that sufficient resources provided to the accused to prepare a defense should include access to documents and other evidence. Such access should be provided to all materials that the prosecution plans to present at trial against the accused, or acquitting the accused. These include not only documents proving the innocence of the accused, but also other evidence that can help the defense. With regard to the availability of a protocol or transcript of a court hearing, the Human Rights Committee recalls that, in accordance with article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the State party must provide the convicted person with access to decisions and documents necessary for the effective exercise of the right to a defence, including complete and verified transcripts or transcripts of court proceedings, and the right to appeal (paragraph 10.4 of the Considerations).
The Committee's assessment of the factual circumstances of the case: it was established that the minutes of the court proceedings were published approximately 29 months after the decision in the first instance and 21 months after the decision in the second instance. After the author filed a request for corrections in November 2009, the protocol of the criminal trial in the court of first instance was only partially corrected in relation to the statements of the author and witnesses, and the rest of the author's claims for corrections were rejected by the court of first instance on the grounds that the request was filed long after the publication of the verdict. The Human Rights Committee noted that the national authorities had accepted the author's requests for corrections to the trial record, but had not refuted them on their merits (paragraph 10.3 of the Views).
The Human Rights Committee considered that the State party had violated its obligations under article 14, paragraph 3 (b), of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by failing to provide the author with sufficient time and opportunity to prepare his defence, in particular by failing to provide him with timely access to accurate and complete court records of both instances, including including in the context of his cassation appeal, which limited the author's ability to defend himself against the charges against him, since the arguments given by him and the witnesses in the courts of first instance, could not be verified. Given the obstacles faced by the author in obtaining timely access to complete and verified trial records, the Human Rights Committee concluded that the State party had violated the author's right to a defence (paragraph 10.4 of the Views).
The Committee's conclusions: The facts presented revealed a violation by the State party of the author's rights under article 14, paragraph 3 (b), of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.