Communicated on 6 September 2019

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 25946/18 Nataša VUČINIĆ against Croatia lodged on 28 May 2018

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the summary minor offences proceedings against the applicant, on charges of a road traffic offence. On 5 February 2017 the police issued a penalty notice finding the applicant guilty of the minor offence of not stopping her vehicle on the red light, fining her 2,000 Croatian kunas (HRK), taking away her driver ’ s licence for a period of three months and ordering her to pay costs of the proceedings in the amount of HRK 100 (in total approximately EUR 280). The applicant challenged the penalty notice before the court, arguing that it had been based exclusively on the incorrect observations of a police officer and that she had not committed the offence in question. She asked the court to hear her in person, as well as to hear G.K., a witness. She further stated that, in the circumstances, the sanction imposed on her had been excessive. On 24 February 2017, without holding a hearing, the court upheld the applicant ’ s conviction, finding that she had admitted committing the minor offence. It reduced her fine to HRK 700, absolved her from paying the costs of the proceedings and quashed the decision taking away her driver ’ s licence. As there was no possibility for the applicant to appeal to a higher court in the minor offences proceedings, on 18 April 2017 she lodged a constitutional complaint before the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ), complaining that her conviction had been upheld on the grounds that she had admitted committing the minor offence, even though she had expressly denied it, and that the court had never heard her in person nor heard a witness she had proposed. The Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant ’ s complaint as manifestly ill-founded.

The applicant complains, under Article 6 of the Convention, about the unfairness of the summary minor offences proceedings against her.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against her, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, were the guarantees of the right to a public hearing and to equality of arms, including the right to defend oneself in person and to examine, or have examined, witnesses, as required by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) and (d) of the Convention, secured in the summary minor offences proceedings against her?