In the case of Kaya v. Belgium, which concerned criminal proceedings in which the applicant was convicted of social-security fraud, the Court found that there had been a failure to comply with the principles of impartiality and the presumption of innocence.

It found that the participation of a particular judge in both the proceedings before the criminal court – which had convicted the applicant – and then before the Court of Cassation, could have raised objectively justified doubts as to the judge’s impartiality and could therefore have called into question the impartiality of the Court of Cassation itself in examining the applicant’s appeal on points of law.

It also found that the statements made in the press by D.M., a public prosecutor who had been responsible for the proceedings against the applicant before the criminal court, had incited the public to believe that the applicant was guilty in the proceedings then pending on appeal, which had infringed his right to the presumption of innocence. . 

• Press release