Al-Khawaja v United Kingdom (2012) 54 EHRR 23 (ECtHR)

Facts

• The case concerned the use of hearsay evidence—statements from individuals not present in court—in criminal proceedings.
• Al-Khawaja was convicted in the UK based mainly on hearsay evidence from a deceased witness.
• The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) was asked to consider whether reliance on such evidence breached Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to a fair trial.
• The trial court had admitted hearsay evidence as primary or sole proof against the accused, raising concerns about the defendant’s ability to question witnesses.
• After the initial ECtHR ruling, the case was reviewed by the Grand Chamber.

Issues

1. Whether the use of hearsay evidence as the sole or decisive basis for a conviction is compatible with Article 6 right to a fair trial.
2. Whether adequate compensatory safeguards existed to mitigate disadvantages arising from the admission of hearsay evidence.
3. How the overall fairness of the trial should be assessed in cases involving hearsay evidence, particularly when a key witness is unavailable.

Decision

• The ECtHR found that reliance on hearsay evidence as the main basis for conviction may breach Article 6 unless adequate safeguards are in place.
• In Al-Khawaja’s case, the Court found the compensatory measures taken during trial were insufficient.
• The Grand Chamber confirmed the "sole or decisive" rule but introduced flexibility, stating that overall fairness must be assessed in light of the entire proceedings.
• The judgment acknowledged that hearsay evidence can be admitted in some circumstances but stressed the need for robust safeguards to ensure fairness.

Legal Principles

• The "sole or decisive" rule: Conviction based exclusively or predominantly on hearsay evidence can undermine the fairness of the trial under Article 6 ECHR.
• Compensatory safeguards, such as additional evidence and opportunities to challenge credibility, are required to counterbalance any disadvantage caused by hearsay.
• The fairness of proceedings must be assessed as a whole, considering reasons for a witness's absence and the type of evidence admitted.
• National legal systems must ensure that their evidentiary rules comply with these principles.

Conclusion

The Al-Khawaja v United Kingdom judgment established the "sole or decisive" rule for hearsay evidence and obligated courts to provide effective safeguards, with overall trial fairness judged holistically under Article 6 ECHR.