The Right of Participation and Information in the Framework of Legal Process

• Author: Joniada Musaraj
• Position: PhD, 'Aleksandër Moisiu' University, Albania, Address: L.1, Rr. Currilave, 2000, Durrës, Albania
• Pages: 25-30

ISSN: 2067 – 9211 Legal and Administrative Sciences in the New Millennium

25

The Right of Participation and Information

in the Framework of Legal Process

Joniada Musaraj1

Abstract: The right of the parties to be present at the hearings and to be informed, even though there have been

ongoing complaints before the European Court of Human Rights, for violations of Article 6 of the Convention,

recent years continue to refer to court cases whose decisions are found to be irregular according to the procedure

and states are fined with high financial costs. There is therefore a need to remind the obligation that the national

authorities have to comply with these decisions and not to be repeated in the future. In support of this purpose,

several issues of the Constitutional Court in Albania and ECHR decisions are addressed. The number of cases

is growing year after year. As a result, we understand that remains the main duty and responsibility of the

judicial authorities in the de facto implementation of the right to participate in trial and information of court

proceedings. While a person should recognize this right and make use of the means made available by the right

to exercise it. It is interesting to show the current situation in which Albania confronts the Convention and the

ECtHR. We have we have over 50 cases so far adjudicated at the European Court of Human Rights, with the

Albanian State party, subject to the violation of Article 6 of the Convention.

Keywords: Convention; Constitutional Court; violation

1. Introduction

The right of the parties to be present and the right to be informed about the judicial process are important

aspects of the due legal process, both constitutional and European.2 This right entrusts the authorities

with the task of notifying, in sufficient time, their parties and their defenders of the date and place of the

court proceedings to request their presence and not to unjustly exclude them from the trial. This is

already a well-known and consolidated practice of the Constitutional Court of Albania and of the

European Court of Human Rights, which would have negated the detailed description of the procedural

1 PhD, “Aleksandër Moisiu” University, Albania, Address: L.1, Rr. Currilave, 2000, Durrës, Albania, Corresponding author:

joniada_d@hotmail.com.

2 European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6/3 / a: 1. Everyone has the right to be heard fairly, publicly and within a

reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law, which will decide on disputes regarding his civil

rights and obligations, as well as on the merits of any criminal charge under his custody. A decision should be made publicly,

but the presence in t he courtroom may be prohibited to the press and to the public throughout the process or during a part of it,

in the interest of morality, public order or national security in a democratic society when this is required by the interests of

juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties in the process or to the extent deemed necessary by the court, when

in special circumstances publicity would undermine the interests of justice. 2. Any person charged with a criminal offense shall

be presumed innocent until his guilt is legally proven. 3. Everyone charged with a criminal offense has the following minimum

rights: a. to be informed within a short deadline, in a language that he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the

charge being raised against him; b. Provide appropriate time and facilities for the preparation of the defense; c. to defend

himself or to be assisted by a defense counsel chosen by him, or if he does not have sufficient means to reward the defense

counsel, be granted free legal aid when the interests of justice so require; d. to ask or ask to question the witnesses of the charge

and to have the right to call and question the witnesses in his favor under the same conditions as the witnesses to the charge; e.

be provided free of charge by an interpreter if he does not understand or speak the language used in court.”