issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 123 (2022)
07.04.2022
Judgments and decisions of 7 April 2022
The European Court of Human Rights has today given notification in writing of six judgments1 and
11 decisions2:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
four separate press releases have been issued for Chamber judgments in the cases of Miklić
v. Croatia (application no. 41023/19), A. L. v. France (no. 13344/20), Callamand v. France
(no. 2338/20), and Landi v. Italy (no. 10929/19);
a separate press release has also been issued for one decision in the case of Povilonis v. Lithuania
(no. 81624/17);
The judgments summarised below are available only in English.
Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan (no. 2) (application no. 32734/11)
The applicant, Eynulla Fatullayev, is an Azerbaijani national who was born in 1976 and lives in Baku.
He is a journalist and was the founder and chief editor of the newspapers Gündəlik Azərbaycan and
Realniy Azerbaijan.
The case concerns the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicant for illegal
possession of drugs while serving a prison sentence. That sentence was the subject of an earlier case
before the Court – Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan (no. 40984/07).
Relying on Article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicant
complains that the criminal proceedings against him were unfair because he was convicted on the
basis of planted and fabricated evidence, and because he was not given an opportunity to effectively
challenge that evidence or to put forward evidence in his favour. The applicant also complains that
the seizure of his case file from the office of his lawyer was in breach of his right of individual
application under Article 34 of the Convention.
Violation of Article 6 § 1
Violation of Article 34
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: 4,000 euros (EUR)
the Court rejected the applicant’s claim for costs and expenses
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a judgment’s
delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five
judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final
judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention,
judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution.
2
Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.
