Case of O.J. and J.O. v. Georgia and Russia (Applications nos. 42126/15 and 42127/15)

A selection of key paragraphs can be found below the judgment.

87. The Court has already held that the de facto Abkhaz courts could not qualify as a “tribunal established by law” for the purposes of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Mamasakhlisi and Others, cited above, § 440, with further references; see also paragraph 76 above). The Court sees no reason to find otherwise in the present case, in the absence of any pertinent information.

Specifically, it finds that the applicants did not benefit from a fair hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. In addition, with reference to the information before it, the Court finds that it cannot be said that the applicants were given a real opportunity to organise their defence and effectively benefit from the assistance of a lawyer throughout the whole proceedings, as required under Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention (see, on this last point, Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, § 255, 13 September 2016). Accordingly, there has been a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention taken together with Article 6 § 3 of the Convention.

88. The Court considers that there is no material difference in the nature of each respondent State’s responsibility under the Convention in respect of the various complaints lodged in the present case (compare Mozer, cited above, § 183, and Mamasakhlisi and Others, cited above, § 429).

Furthermore, the Court finds that the situation in respect of the legal and judicial system in Abkhazia, as described in paragraph 76 above, cannot be attributed to Georgia.

89. Accordingly, for the reasons set out above in respect of the complaint under Article 5 of the Convention (see paragraph 76 above), the Court finds that there has been no violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention by Georgia. On the other hand, for the reasons set out in paragraph 81 above, the Court finds that there has been a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention by the Russian Federation.