CASE OF HENNINGS v. GERMANYDISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE WALSH

Doc ref: • ECHR ID:

Document date: December 16, 1992

Doc ref: • ECHR ID:

Document date: December 16, 1992

Cited paragraphs only

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE WALSH

1. By virtue of sections 407-410 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure the applicant was "convicted", without a trial, of two

criminal offences, namely coercion and dangerous assault. The

fact that the offences are classed as minor offences does not

alter the applicable principles of Article 6 (art. 6) of the

Convention. There was no public hearing or indeed any hearing,

at which evidence was given or at which it would have been

possible to cross examine witnesses prior to conviction.

Therefore before there was any offer of an opportunity to object

the applicant was adjudged to be guilty and that decision would

so remain unless set aside on the objection of the applicant.

2. It appears to me that such a procedure throws the burden on

the applicant to prove he is innocent which is a violation of the

presumption of innocence guaranteed by Article 6 (art. 6). More

fundamental however is that a conviction was recorded without

being preceded by a trial.

3. I am therefore of the opinion that there has been a breach

of Article 6 (art. 6) on two counts.

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant