Reference no: EM133313333

Assignment:

Romaria is a Contracting State to the ECHR. Two years ago, Felipe, a Romarian citizen, was arrested. After three days of questioning, he was finally charged with a driving offence. His request for a lawyer at the police station was denied on the ground that he was unable to afford legal fees.

Prior to the trial, which took place last month, the prosecution refused to disclose its evidence. During the trial, from which the press were excluded, neither Felipe nor his lawyer were permitted to cross examine prosecution witnesses.

Under Romarian law, judges are normally appointed for life by an independent panel of senior judges, on the grounds of qualifications, competence and experience of advocacy. However, the same law gives the President of Romaria the power to appoint judges, on a temporary basis, if they are "appropriate persons". Of the three judges presiding over Felipe's trial, two were appointed by the normal procedure and one directly by the President on a rolling one month contract.

The trial was conducted entirely in Polenian, a minority language spoken in the area of Romaria in which Felipe lived. Felipe speaks Romarian, the national language, but not Polenian. His request for a translator was refused.

Felipe was convicted and sentenced to one year's imprisonment. No reasons were given for the judgment, which was given in a written letter to the lawyers for both sides. Felipe was not permitted to appeal.

However, Felipe's woes are not yet at an end. He has also been informed that the Romarian Architects' Council has revoked his licence to practice as an architect. He was not notified of the disciplinary proceedings against him by the Council and has no right of appeal.

Advise Felipe on his likely chances of success in an action alleging breach of Article 6 by the State of Romaria. You should assume that the admissibility criteria are satisfied.