21 Aug Domestic violence

In the case   N.K. v. Germany (no. 59549/12, 26/07/2018) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (Right to a fair trial and right for the accused to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him). The applicant, N.K., is a German national currently in detention. The case concerned criminal proceedings brought against him for domestic violence.

N.K. was arrested in September 2009 on suspicion of violence against his wife and detained on remand. An investigating judge, without appointing counsel for the applicant, had questioned his wife, who had stated that she suffered violence from the applicant until she was able to escape from home and find shelter in neighbor’s home. She stated that her husband had repeatedly assaulted her throughout their marriage, but that the assaults had escalated during that weekend.

During the trial against the applicant, his wife refused to give testimony. The Regional Court nonetheless relied on the testimony she had made to the investigating judge to convict the applicant in June 2010, sentencing him to six and a half years’ imprisonment.

The Regional Court also relied on statements made by a number of witnesses to the events on 2 August 2009 and to the applicant’s wife’s injuries, including: the counsellor at the women’s shelter where the applicant’s wife had been admitted; the son of the applicant’s wife, who had been at home in his room during the weekend in question; a number of neighbours who had helped the applicant’s wife; and, by police officers who had been called to the scene.

The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law and a constitutional complaint, without success. Relying on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) (right to obtain attendance and examination of witnesses), N.K. complained that the proceedings against him had been unfair because neither he nor his counsel had been given the opportunity at any stage to examine his wife, who was the only direct witness to the offences of which he was found guilty.

The Court stated that pre-trial statements by the applicant’s wife, were not the only evidence on which the Regional Court relied in its judgment. There were other strong evidence as outlined above, on the basis of which the applicant was convicted. There has accordingly been no violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention.

References from the official website of the European Court of Human Rights