IR, Spetsializirana prokuratura (Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Right to be present at the trial - Inability to locate the accused person notwithstanding - Judgment) [2022] EUECJ C-569/20 (19 May 2022)

IR, Spetsializirana prokuratura (Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Right to be present at the trial - Inability to locate the accused person notwithstanding - Judgment) [2022] EUECJ C-569/20 (19 May 2022)

Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 2016/343 require that an accused who could not be located despite reasonable efforts and was not informed of the trial must, in principle, be able to rely directly on the right to a new trial or equivalent remedy. This right may be denied only if precise and objective indicia show the accused deliberately evaded justice after being sufficiently informed of impending trial.

Citation
[2022] EUECJ C-569/20
Parties
Accused: IR; Prosecutor: Spetsializirana prokuratura (Specialised Public Prosecutor’s Office, Bulgaria)
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
19 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling (eu Law) / Reference From National Court (specialised Criminal Court, Bulgaria) to Court of Justice of the European Union
Outcome
Preliminary ruling issued; interpretation of Directive 2016/343 provided.
Legal Topics
Presumption of Innocence, Right to Be Present at Trial, In Absentia Proceedings, Right to a New Trial, Procedural Safeguards, Waiver of Rights
Criminal Law European Union Law Human Rights Law Presumption of Innocence Right to Be Present at Trial In Absentia Proceedings Right to a New Trial Procedural Safeguards +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IR

Accused

Spetsializirana prokuratura (Specialised Public Prosecutor’s Office, Bulgaria)

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling (eu Law) / Reference From National Court (specialised Criminal Court, Bulgaria) to Court of Justice of the European Union

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 2016/343 require that an accused tried in absentia, who could not be located despite reasonable efforts, must be granted the right to a new trial or equivalent remedy.
  2. 2 Whether national law precluding such a right solely due to absconding is compatible with Directive 2016/343.
  3. 3 Whether Articles 8(4) and 9 of Directive 2016/343 have direct effect.

Ratio Decidendi

Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 2016/343 require that an accused who could not be located despite reasonable efforts and was not informed of the trial must, in principle, be able to rely directly on the right to a new trial or equivalent remedy. This right may be denied only if precise and objective indicia show the accused deliberately evaded justice after being sufficiently informed of impending trial.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling issued; interpretation of Directive 2016/343 provided.

Orders

  • Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 2016/343 must be interpreted as requiring that an accused who cannot be located despite reasonable efforts and is not informed of the trial may be tried and convicted in absentia, but must, in principle, be able to rely directly on the right to a new trial or equivalent remedy. This...