Communicated on 18 June 2020 Published on 6 July 2020

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 13919/18 Stojna DIMCHEVSKA against North Macedonia lodged on 15 March 2018

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The applicant ’ s request for reopening of criminal proceedings in which she had been convicted in absentia and sentenced to a suspended prison term was di smissed at two court instances. The dismissal was based on the following grounds: ( i ) admitted evidence and facts established in the criminal proceedings (conducted in absentia) had been sufficient to secure the applicant ’ s conviction; (ii) in those proceedings she had been assigned an ex officio lawyer who had not appealed against the trial court ’ s judgment; (iii) allegedly new evidence proposed by the applicant in support of her request for reopening (numerous loan agreements and an expert opinion) could not have altered the result of the criminal proceedings.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Having regard to the general principles concerning trial in absentia established by the Court (see Sejdovic v. Italy [GC] , no. 56581/00, §§ 82 and 84, 1 March 2006), did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charge against her, in accordanc e with Article 6 of the Convention?