European Court of Human Rights - case of Huber v. Switzerland (1990) (excerpts)

European Court of Human Rights - case of Huber v. Switzerland (1990) (excerpts)

(...)

43. The Court sees no grounds for reaching a different

conclusion in this case as regards criminal justice under the

ordinary law. Clearly the Convention does not rule out the

possibility of the judicial officer who orders the detention

carrying out other duties, but his impartiality is capable of

appearing open to doubt (see the Pauwels judgment cited above,

Series A no. 135, pp. 18-19, para. 38, and, mutatis mutandis, the

Piersack judgment of 1 October 1982, Series A no. 53, p. 16,

para. 31, the De Cubber judgment of 26 October 1984, Series A

no. 86, p. 16, para. 30 and the Hauschildt judgment of 24 May 1989,

Series A no. 154, p. 23, para. 52 in fine) if he is entitled to

intervene in the subsequent criminal proceedings as a

representative of the prosecuting authority.


Since that was the situation in the present case (see

paragraphs 26-27 above), there has been a breach of Article 5

para. 3 (art. 5-3).