Citaat | Hoge Raad 5 april 2022
Onder 2.4.4 Hoge Raad 5 april 2022
Een alinea uit Hoge Raad 5 april 2022, ECLI:NL:HR:2022:513.
“118. The Court reiterates at the outset that it is of fundamental importance in a democratic society that the courts inspire confidence in the public and above all, as far as criminal proceedings are concerned, in the accused (see Padovani v. Italy, judgment of 26 February 1993, Series A no. 257-B, p. 20, § 27). To that end Article 6 requires a tribunal falling within its scope to be impartial. Impartiality normally denotes the absence of prejudice or bias and its existence or otherwise can be tested in various ways. The Court has thus distinguished between a subjective approach, that is endeavouring to ascertain the personal conviction or interest of a given judge in a particular case, and an objective approach, that is determining whether he or she offered sufficient guarantees to exclude any legitimate doubt in this respect (see Piersack v. Belgium, judgment of 1 October 1982, Series A no. 53, pp. 14-15, § 30, and Grieves v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 57067/00 (https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng), § 69, 16 December 2003). As to the second test, when applied to a body sitting as a bench, it means determining whether, quite apart from the personal conduct of any of the members of that body, there are ascertainable facts which may raise doubts as to its impartiality. In this respect even appearances may be of some importance (see Castillo Algar v. Spain, judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII, p. 3116, § 45, and Morel v. France, no. 34130/96 (https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng), § 42, ECHR 2000-VI). When it is being decided whether in a given case there is a legitimate reason to fear that a particular body lacks impartiality, the standpoint of those claiming that it is not impartial is important but not decisive. What is decisive is whether the fear can be held to be objectively justified (see Ferrantelli and Santangelo v. Italy, judgment of 7 August 1996, Reports 1996-III, pp. 951-52, § 58, and Wettstein v. Switzerland, no. 33958/96 (https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng), § 44, ECHR 2000-XII).
Zelf controleren
Voor dit citaat hoeft niemand Bron op zijn woord te geloven. Het document dat rechtspraak.nl publiceerde, staat op https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/70c6bfbccf22ea573716521e6bd58ad2936a397f42dd98257a79b82d5fd43868. Wie het ophaalt en de SHA-256 ervan berekent, krijgt 70c6bfbccf22ea573716521e6bd58ad2936a397f42dd98257a79b82d5fd43868, en de alinea staat in dat document op bytes 26836 tot 28884.
$ curl -s https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/70c6bfbccf22ea573716521e6bd58ad2936a397f42dd98257a79b82d5fd43868 | shasum -a 256