Guidebook 183 184 185 186 187 188 Directive on the right to information, Recital 31. Directive on the right to information, Art 7(5). Directive on the right to information, Art 7(1). Directive on the right to information, Art 7(2) and (3). Directive on the right to information, Art 7(4). Directive on the right to information, Art 3(2); Timergaliyev v Russia, App No 40631/02 (ECtHR, 14 October 2008) (hearing disabilities); Brozicek v Italy, App No 10964/84 (ECtHR, 19 December 1989); Saman v Turkey; Panovits v Cyprus, App No 4268/04 (ECtHR, 11 December 2008). See also FRA, ‘Translation, Interpretation and Information’ (2016), p. 23 and Fair Trials, ‘Roadmap: Right to Information’, p 25. See also, In the context of minors see: Beijing Rules Art 7(1); CRPD Art. 2. See FRA, ‘Translation, Interpretation and Information’ (2016), p24 with further references. 189 Directive on the right to information, Art 4(4). 190 Directive on the right to information, Art 8. 191 Lloyd-Cape, p 5. 192 HRC, ‘General Comment No 24 on Issues Relating to Reservations Made upon Ratification or Accession to the Covenant or the Optional Protocols thereto, or in Relation to Declarations under Article 41 of the Covenant’ (1994) CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.6, para 8. 193 ICCPR: Art 14(2); UDHR : Art 40 (2)(b)(i) ; ECHR: Art 6. 194 FTE, 'Innocent until proven guilty? The presentation of suspects in criminal proceedings. The presentation of suspects and accused', (June 2019) p4 (hereinafter: FTE, The presentation of suspects and accused). 195 The Directive on presumption of innocencealso sets standards for the presence at the trial. However, in the framework of this project that aspect will not be dealt with. 196 FTE, The presentation of suspects and accused, p 8. 197 FTE, The presentation of suspects and accused, p 13. 198 Directive 2016/343/EU on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings – Art 3 (hereinafter: Directive on Presumption of innocence); see also Art 11 (1) UDHR. 199 Arts 4 and 5 Directive on Presumption of innocence; see also Nestak v Slovakia, App no 65559/01 (ECtHR, 27 February 2007); Garycki v Poland, App no 14348/02 (ECtHR, 6 February 2007); Daktaras v Lithuania, App No 42095/98 (ECtHR, 10 October 2000); Petkov v Bulgaria. 200 Milev, C-310/18 PPU (CJEU, 19 September 2018). 201 Directive on presumption of innocence, Art 5. 202 Ramishvili and Kokhreidze v Georgia, App No 1704/06 (ECtHR, 27 January 2009); Karachentsev v Russia, App no 23229/11 (ECtHR, 17 April 2018) (hereinafter Karachentsev v Russia); Svinarenko et Slyadnev v Russia, App Nos 32541/08; 43441/08 (ECtHR, 17 July 2014). 203 FTE, The presentation of suspects and accused, pp 4 ff. 204 Lloyd-Cape, pp64, 66; FRA, ‘Rights in practice’ (2019), pp 29 ff. 205 SRT (Theo van Boven), ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur’ (2003) E/CN.4/2004/56, para 34. 206 CAT Committee, ‘General Comment No 2 on the Implementation of Article 2 by States Parties’ (2008) UN Doc CAT/C/GC/2, para 14. 207 Special Rapporteur on Torture (SRT, Méndez, Juan), ‘Interim Report’ (2016) A/71/298. 208 CPT, ‘Police custody: Extract from the 2nd General Report of the CPT’ (1992), CPT/ 138 FOOTNOTES Inf(92)3-part1, paras 39 and 40; CPT, ‘12th General report on the CPT´s activities’ (2002), CPT/Inf (2002) para 15. 209 Fair Trials, ‘ProCam International desk report: Audiovisual recordings during interrogations’ (January 2018), pp 9 and 10. 210 The Hungarian Helsinki Committee (HHC), ‘Procedural rights observed by the camera’ (2019), p 21 ff 211 The Paris Principles; GAHNRI, SCA GO; as well as the Declarations taken over the years in the framework of the International Conferences of NHRIs. 212 The Paris Principles, section A.1 and A.2; GANHRI, SCA GO, G.O.1.2, Justification, para (ii), p 8. 213 On the relationship between NHRIs and the UN see Katrien Meuwissen, ‘NHRI participation to United Nations Human Rights Procedures: International Promotions versus Institutional consolidation?’ in Jan Wouters and Katrien Meuwissen (eds.) National Human Rights Institutions in Europe: Comparative, European and International Perspectives (Intersentia 2013) pp 263-286; GANHRI and UNICEF, ‘Children´s Rights in National Human Rights Institutions: A Mapping Exercise’ (2018) p 15, in particular footnote 16. 214 GAHNRI, SCA GO, para 7. 215 Slovenia has applied to the SCA in relation to the 2017 legislative change on promotional functions and will be reviewed in March 2020 session. The relevant legislative change is: Slovenia, Act Amending the Human Rights Ombudsman Act (Zakon o dopolnitvah Zakona o varuhu človekovih pravic (ZVarCP-B)), Official Gazette RS No. 54/2017. 216 Estonia has applied to the SCA in relation to the 2018 legislative change and will be reviewed in March 2020 session. The relevant legislative change is the Amendment to the Chancellor of Justice Act adopted on 13.06.2018 that entered into force on 1.01.2019. 217 Kucsko-Stadlmayer, European Ombudsman-Institutions: A comparative legal analysis regarding the multifaceted realisation of an idea (Springer 2008) pp 62-69 (hereinafter Kucsko-Stadlmayer, 2008). See also Reif, The Ombudsman, Good Governance and the International Human Rights System (Springer 2004). 218 Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Resolution 2301 (2019) on Ombudsman institutions in Europe - the need for a set of common standards, 2 October 2019. 219 Principles on The Protection and Promotion of the Ombudsman Institution adopted by the Venice Commission at its 118th Plenary Session (Venice, 15-16 March 2019) (hereinafter The Venice Principles). 220 GAHNRI, SCA GO, para 1.9. On independence see also Katrien Meuwissen, ‘NHRIs and the State: New and Independent Actors in the Multi-layered Human Rights System?’ (2015) HRLR 15 pp 441–484. 221 The Paris Principles, Methods of Operation, A 222 The Paris Principles, Principle 2, A. 223 See Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR), ‘Study on the Implementation of Article 33 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Europe’, pp 13ff. 224 OHCHR, ‘National Human Rights Institutions: History, Principles, Roles and Responsibilities’ (2010), p 41 (hereinafter OHCHR, ‘NHRI’ (2010)). 225 OHCHR, ‘NHRI’ (2010), p 42. 226 OHCHR, ‘Study on the Implementation of Article 33 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Europe’, p 50. 227 OHCHR, ‘NHRI’ (2010), p 41. 139