Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

P.S. v. Germany

P.S. v. Germany    [  ] P.S. v. GERMANY Right to examine witnesses – violation Article 6, Section 3(d) The procedure followed by the judicial authorities where the evidence of a child, reported in court by third persons, one of them a close relative, was the only direct evidence of the sexual offence in question and the domestic courts based their finding of the applicant’s guilt to a decisive extent on the child’s statements could not be considered as having enabled the defence to challenge the evidence. In a judgment delivered on  December  in the case of P.S. v. Germany , the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a viola- tion of Article  , Section  (d) (right to examine witnesses) of the European Con- vention on Human Rights. This judgment is not final. Pursuant to Article  , Section  of the Convention, within three months from the date of the judgment of a Chamber, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the Grand Cham- ber.  . Principal facts The applicant, P.S., is a German national. In the late http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Rights Case Digest Brill

P.S. v. Germany

Human Rights Case Digest , Volume 12 (11-12): 951 – Jan 1, 2001
Download PDF
5 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/p-s-v-germany-h82xT1uxEm

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2001 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0965-934X
eISSN
1571-8131
DOI
10.1163/157181301401747866
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

   [  ] P.S. v. GERMANY Right to examine witnesses – violation Article 6, Section 3(d) The procedure followed by the judicial authorities where the evidence of a child, reported in court by third persons, one of them a close relative, was the only direct evidence of the sexual offence in question and the domestic courts based their finding of the applicant’s guilt to a decisive extent on the child’s statements could not be considered as having enabled the defence to challenge the evidence. In a judgment delivered on  December  in the case of P.S. v. Germany , the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a viola- tion of Article  , Section  (d) (right to examine witnesses) of the European Con- vention on Human Rights. This judgment is not final. Pursuant to Article  , Section  of the Convention, within three months from the date of the judgment of a Chamber, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the Grand Cham- ber.  . Principal facts The applicant, P.S., is a German national. In the late

Journal

Human Rights Case Digest – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 2001

There are no references for this article.