ECtHR jurisprudence: Articles 6 and 10 of the ECHR. Piersack v. Belgium, (8692/79); Cubber v. Belgium (9186/80); Borgers v. Belgium (12005/86); Micallef v. Malta (17056/06).
Topic: Impartiality (Conflict of Interest)Rule of law (Fair Trial/ Access to Justice)
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): The national case is a direct follow up of the CJEU order of 27 September 2018
ECtHR jurisprudence: Article 3 ECHRArticle 6 ECHRArticle 13 ECHRECtHR judgments:Gebremedhin v. France of 26 April 2007Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy of 23 February 2012Krombach v. France of 13 February 2001Annoni v. France of 14 November 2000
Topic: independence, impartiality, freedom of expression
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A
ECtHR jurisprudence: Art. 10 European Convention on Human RightsDecision of the ECtHR from 28. 10. 1999, Wille v Lichtenstein, application no. 28396/95Decision of the ECtHR from 22. 2. 2007, Krasulya v Russia, application no. 12365/03
Topic: independence, impartiality, freedom of expression
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A
ECtHR jurisprudence: Art. 10 European Convention on Human RightsDecision of the EctHR from 27. 5. 2014, Baka v Hungary, application no. 20261/12 Decision of the EctHR from 26. 2. 2009, Kudeshkina v Russia, application no. 29492/05Decision of the EctHR from 16. 9. 1999, Buscemi v Italy, application no. 29569/95Decision of the EctHR from 28. 10. 1999, Wille v Lichtenstein, application no. 28396/95
Project implemented with financial support of the Fundamental Rights & Citizenship Programme of the European Union