Available in Russian
Keywords: conviction; criminal offence; Engel criteria; fundamental defect in proceedings; reopening of case; the right not to be tried or punished twice
The decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Mihalache v. Romania considered the complaint of Mr. Mihalache who asked that the duplication of proceedings in his case and that he had been tried and convicted twice for the same offence had violated Article 4 of Protocol no.7 to the Convention (the right not to be tried or punished twice). Based on the criteria in the Engel case, the Court found that the proceedings in question were “criminal” in nature. Moreover, the European Court ruled that both proceedings concerned the factual circumstances in respect of an applicant who refused to take a blood alcohol test, in violation of the ne bis in idem principle. In order to reach a decision on the case, the Court also set itself the task of interpreting certain provisions in the light of Article 4 of Protocol no.7 to the Convention, namely the concepts of “acquittal”, “conviction” and “final” decision. The Court concluded that in the present case the duplication of proceedings does not meet the criteria established in paragraph 2 of Article 4 of Protocol no.7 to the Convention such as “new or newly discovered facts” or “fundamental defect in the previous proceedings, which could affect the outcome of the case”.
Citation: Evropeyskiy Sud po pravam cheloveka: obzor postanovleniya ot 8 iyulya 2019 goda po delu Mihalache protiv Rumynii (zhaloba No.54012/10) [European Court of Human Rights: review of the Grand Chamber judgment of 8 July 2019 in the case of Mihalache v. Romania (application no.54012/10)]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, 2019, vol.9, no.3, pp.29–38. (In Russian).