Back Judgement of the European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber) of September 25, 2018 - A.K. Denisov v Ukraine

Judgement of the European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber) of September 25, 2018 - A.K. Denisov v Ukraine

31.08.2021

 

 

Case: Case 76629/11

Descriptors: Right to a fair process / Impartiality and independence of the Courts / Judges irremovability principle

 

The appellant was dismissed as President of the Kyiv Administrative Court of Appeals by the High Council of Justice (HCP), alleging, as a reason for his dismissal, failure to perform the functions associated with his position. Judge Denisov appealed to the Higher Administrative Court (HAC) stating that the decision was arbitrary and contra legem, and denounced the lack of impartiality and independence of the HCP, constituting a violation of Article 6.1 of the Convention. The HAC dismissed the claim on the grounds that it was unfounded and also asserted that the appellant was heard at all times and participated in the proceeding.

Therefore, in the present litigation, the Court examines the HCP and HAC actions to determine whether they acted with independence and impartiality, guaranteeing at all times the right to due process of Mr. Denisov (paragraph 67). Regarding the HCP, the Court considers that the principles of independence and impartiality were violated due to the existence of notorious deficits in the body's composition, made up mostly of members outside the judicial career; as well as by a magistrate who had participated in the preliminary investigation of the case, for which his objectivity was far from being flawless (paragraphs 71-72).

Regarding the HAC's performance, the Court affirms that it was insufficient to preserve the fairness of the process, also noting that the members of the HAC are subject to disciplinary processes initiated by the HCP, a structure that raises reasonable doubts about its own impartiality and independence with which the aforementioned court can conduct itself. In conclusion, the European Court of Human Rights recognizes the existence of a violation of Article 6.1 of the Convention, although the allegation regarding the possible violation of the right to privacy recognized in Article 8 of the Convention is inadmissible.

 

Read the decision

Multimedia

Categories:

SDG - Sustainable Development Goals:

Els ODS a la UPF

Contact