Moreno v Spain, UN Human Rights Committee (2005) (excerpts)

Moreno v Spain, UN Human Rights Committee Communication 1381/2005 (excerpts)

(...)


7.2 The Committee takes note of the State party's arguments that conviction in cassation is compatible with the Covenant, and that the conviction by the Supreme Court was effectively reviewed by the Constitutional Court by means of the remedy of amparo. The Committee recalls its jurisprudence that the absence of any right of review in a higher court of a conviction handed down by an appeal court, where the person was found not guilty by a lower court, is a violation of article 14, paragraph 5, of the Covenant.[FN7] In the present case, the Supreme Court convicted the author of the offence of misappropriation on the ground that prescription did not apply, and set aside the judgement handed down at first instance by the National High Court, which had acquitted him on the grounds that the offence was time-barred. The Committee notes that the Constitutional Court considered the facts of the case in the course of its review of the constitutional issues raised. However, the Committee cannot agree that that consideration meets the standard set by article 14, paragraph 5, for a review of the conviction.