Right to Respect for one’s Private Life

COUNCIL OF EUROPE. EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Information note # 95 on the case-law of the Court, March 2007, Pages 18-19.

FACTS

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

A woman was attacked and her handbag stolen. The police arrested A.M. and took him into custody. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure (the CCP) a District Court judge ordered the surveillance and recording of calls made on the applicant’s mobile telephone. A.B., a girlfriend of A.M., arranged to meet the applicant. She was fitted by the police with a listening device hidden under her clothing. In the course of their recorded conversation, this applicant admitted that he had organized the robbery with A.M. The police dismissed the applicants request to exclude the recording of the conversation from the case file, noting that it had been made in accordance with the law and with the consent of A.B. The City Court found the applicant and A.M. guilty of robbery and sentenced them to nine years imprisonment, whilst they protested their innocence. The court based its judgment on various testimony and documents, but one of the most important items of written evidence was the list of the telephone calls on the mobile phones of the two defendants. A transcription of the conversation between A.B. and the applicant was described as crucial evidence but was not the sole evidence against them. In response to the applicant’s plea that this evidence was unlawful, the court observed that A.B. had consented to the fitting of the listening devices and that, under the CCP, anything capable of shedding light on a criminal case could be used in evidence. The High Court dismissed appeals against the judgment at the first instance, confirming that the previous findings were correct. The applicant also lodged a constitutional appeal, arguing that the production of the recording of his conversation with A.B. and its use as evidence, incriminating the applicant before he had been notified of any charge, had breached articles 6 and 8 of the Convention. The telephone company informed A.M. that the list of telephone calls had been produced at the request of the authorities in connection with a criminal investigation, under a provision of the CCP. It further referred to the provision from the Telecommunications Act. The Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal, holding, among other considerations, that the courts have convicted him on the basis of various evidence which had been lawfully obtained and assessed. As to the use of the listening and recording device hidden on A.B., the Constitutional Court agreed with the High Court that it was not a prohibited measure under the CCP. It considered, however, that the recording should not have been used in evidence in the criminal proceedings, but that it did not render unconstitutional the decisions adopted in those proceedings as the applicant’s conviction had been based on a number of items of evidence. The Court declared manifestly ill-founded a constitutional appeal by A.M.

NOTES:

applicant - проситель, ходатай, податель петиции; заявитель

surveillance - надзор, наблюдение (за подозреваемым в чем-л.)

listening device – прослушивающее устройство

case file – материалы дела

transcription – запись

findings - полученные данные, добытые сведения

to incriminate - инкриминировать, обвинять в преступлении (in), возлагать вину

to breach - нарушать (закон, моральные или материальные обязательства и т. п.)

plea - заявление, сделанное в суде одной из сторон

to shed light - проливать свет на (что-л.)

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

1) Полиция арестовала А. М. и взяла его под стражу. 2) Судья районного суда распорядился вести надзор за подозреваемым и записывать его переговоры по мобильному телефону. 3) Полиция установила подслушивающее устройство под одеждой подружки А.М. 4) Этот проситель признался, что он организовал это ограбление вместе с А.М. 5) Городской Суд признал просителя и A.M. виновными в ограблении и приговорил их к девяти годам тюремного заключения.

(c) Give Russian equivalents of the following sentences:

1) The court based its judgment on various testimony and documents, but one of the most important items of written evidence was the list of the telephone calls on the mobile phones of the two defendants. 2) In response to the applicant’s plea that this evidence was unlawful, the court observed that A.B. had consented to the fitting of the listening devices and that, under the CCP, anything capable of shedding light on a criminal case could be used in evidence. 3) The High Court dismissed appeals against the judgment at the first instance, confirming that the previous findings were correct. 4) The applicant also lodged a constitutional appeal, arguing that the production of the recording of his conversation with A.B. and its use as evidence, incriminating the applicant before he had been notified of any charge, had breached articles 6 and 8 of the Convention. 5) The telephone company informed A.M. that the list of telephone calls had been produced at the request of the authorities in connection with a criminal investigation, under a provision of the CCP.

(d) Fill in the gaps with appropriate words:

The Constitutional Court dismissed....... applicant’s appeal, holding, among............ considerations, that the courts......... convicted him on the....... of various evidence which........ been lawfully obtained and........... As to the use...... the listening and recording......... hidden on A.B., the..................... Court agreed with the............ Court that it was...... a prohibited measure under..... CCP. It considered, however, that...... recording should not have.......... used in evidence in........ criminal proceedings, but that....... did not render unconstitutional....... decisions adopted in those................ as the applicant’s conviction........ been based on a.......... of items of evidence........ Court declared manifestly ill-founded........ constitutional appeal by A.M.

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

1) to notify of a charge   2) under a provision of 3) the Code of Criminal Procedure (the CCP)   4) item of written evidence 5) to dismiss a request 6) in response to 7) to lodge a constitutional appeal 8) in connection with 9) to adopt a decision   10) ill-founded

a) отдельный предмет письменных доказательств b) принять решение c) подать апелляцию в соответствии с конституцией d) уведомлять о предъявляемом обвинении e) безосновательный, необоснованный f) отклонять просьбу g) по/согласно положению, постановлению h) в ответ на i) кодекс, свод законов (государства) об уголовном процессе j) в связи с чем-л.

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

1) How many persons are involved in the case as a defendant party?

2) How many persons committed the crime?

3) Where did the convicts apeal the Court’s decision?

4) What did the convicts protest?

5) What was the High Court’s decision?

6) What do you think the law says on the case?