European Court of Human Rights condemns Spain, unanimously, for lack of impartiality at trial of Basque politicians

Applicants in trial related to banned group ETA had justified fears about judges’ lack of impartiality at trial. In today’s Chamber judgment1 in the case of Otegi Mondragon v. Spain (application no. 4184/15) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been:
a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
It also held, by six votes to one, that the finding of a violation alone was sufficient just satisfaction in
the case.
The case concerned the applicants’ complaint of bias on the part of judges who convicted them for
being members of the ETA organisation. The Court found in particular that the first applicant in the case had previously won an appeal
against a conviction on different ETA-related charges because the presiding judge had shown a lack
of impartiality, which had contaminated the whole panel in that case and had led to a retrial.
The same panel, including the judge who had presided in the earlier trial, had convicted all five
applicants in a second set of proceedings on different charges a year later. The applicants had thus
had objectively justified fears that these judges lacked impartiality in their case.

Link to the ECHR note