Abstract
The European Court of Human Rights recently changed its position on the right to examine witnesses. This right was diminished in two ways. Firstly, in the Al-Khawaja and Tahery judgment, the ECtHR abandoned the rule that it must be possible at all times to question a decisive witness and so created the possibility to test the reliability of a decisive witness statement in other ways. Secondly, the ECtHR’s decision in Ellis, Simms & Martin opened the possibility to base a conviction solely, or to a decisive extent, on anonymous witness statements, which was previously not allowed. As a result, anonymous witness statements can now play a far larger part in the ruling on the evidence than previously possible. This article examines the most important changes brought about by recent case law, how they relate to previous case law, and the impact of this new case law.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
