Chapter vi  Equality of Arms and Rights to a Fair Hearing 109 equal and inalienable rights of all human beings.430 To be fair, the conduct of a hearing must comply with various requirements. Some of these requirements are expressed as minimum guarantees in criminal proceedings (see Article 14(3) of the ICCPR and Article 6(3) of the ECHR). This means that such guarantees are not exhaustive, such that the particular needs of a case may require these guarantees to be supplemented. As recognized by the European Court in Artico v Italy, a criminal trial may fail to fulfil the requirements of a fair trial, even if the minimum guarantees in Article 6(3) of the ECHR are upheld.431 It follows that the minimum guarantees in those Articles will not be interpreted and applied in isolation, but will instead be treated as aspects of the overall right to a fair trial as spelled out in Articles 14(1) and 6(1).432 Although these minimum guarantees do not expressly apply to noncriminal proceedings, there are, in a number of instances, parallel rights applicable to civil proceedings, based either on the principle of equality of arms (See also 6.1) or on the overall need to ensure that proceedings are “fair” (as required by Article 14(1) of the ICCPR and Article 6(1) of the ECHR). An assessment of whether a hearing has been fair will ultimately depend on the full circumstances of the case, the gravity of the matter being determined by the court, as well as its consequences, and whether or not the irregularity caused actual prejudice to a party in the proceedings. Emphasis will be placed on providing a practical and effective exercise of rights. This reference represents one of the main and most commonly used benchmarks for the European Court of Human Rights to assess State compliance with the ECHR. As explained in the UN ECOSOC’s Siracusa Principles, the right to a fair and public hearing may be subject to legitimate restrictions that are strictly required by the exigencies of an emergency situation, i.e., an emergency declared under Article 4 of the ICCPR or Article 15 of the ECHR as one threatening the life of the nation. Even in such situations, however, the Siracusa Principles (and the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment on the right to a fair trial) explain that the denial of certain fair trial rights can never occur, even in an emergency situation, because “the principles of legality and the rule of law require that fundamental requirements of fair trial must be respected during a state of emergency”.433 This list includes the following fair trial rights applicable to any person charged with a criminal offence:434 • The right to be informed of the charges promptly, in detail and in a language understood by the defendant (See also 6.3.1); • The right to have adequate time and facilities to prepare the defence, (See also 6.3) including the right to communication confidentially with legal counsel (See also 6.6.6); 430 Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, Copenhagen 1990, para 5. 431 Artico v Italy [1980] ECHR 4, para 32. 432 Czekalla v Portugal [2002] ECHR 662, para 59. 433 UN Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment 29 (2001), para 16. 434 UN ECOSOC, Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN Doc E/CN.4/1985/4, Annex (1985), para 70(g).