Al-Khawaja and Tahery v United Kingdom [2009]

Court: European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

Background: The applicants, Al-Khawaja and Tahery, were convicted of serious crimes in the UK. Their trials involved hearsay evidence, including statements from witnesses who did not testify in court. The applicants argued that this violated their right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), particularly Article 6(3)(d), which guarantees the right to examine or have examined witnesses against them.

Issue: Whether the admission of hearsay evidence without providing the accused an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses violated their right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the ECHR.

Held: The ECtHR ruled that there had been a violation of the applicants' right to a fair trial. The court established that while hearsay evidence can be admitted under certain circumstances, the unavailability of the witness must be convincingly demonstrated. In the cases of Al-Khawaja and Tahery, the court found that the hearsay evidence admitted against them was not sufficiently justified and that the procedural safeguards to protect their rights were inadequate.

Key Judicial Statement: The court highlighted the importance of balancing the rights of the accused with the need to protect genuinely unavailable witnesses. It stressed that the domestic courts must ensure that the use of hearsay evidence is necessary, proportionate, and supported by sufficient procedural safeguards to uphold the right to a fair trial.

💡Leveluplaw: This case clarified the ECtHR’s approach to hearsay evidence, emphasizing that while such evidence can be permissible, it must be accompanied by effective safeguards to ensure fairness. The decision reinforced that the right to confront witnesses is crucial and that any deviation from this right must be carefully justified to maintain the integrity of the trial process.