Kannas v The Police

• Jurisdiction: Chipre
• Court: Supreme Court (Cyprus)
• Date: 07 April 1968

Cyprus, Supreme Court.

(Vassiliades P.; Triantafyllides and Josephides JJ.)

Kannas

and

The Police.

International law Relation to municipal law International conventions and Constitution Provisions in similar terms European Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Constitution of Cyprus Right to sufficient details of criminal charge Interpretation of similar provision in Constitution of Cyprus by reference to jurisprudence of European Commission The law of Cyprus.

Treaties Interpretation of Principles and rules of Interpretation of similar provisions in international convention and Constitution European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Constitution of Cyprus Interpretation by reference to jurisprudence of European Commission The law of Cyprus.

The individual in international law Position of Human Rights and Freedoms European Convention for Protection of Article 6 (3) (a) Constitution of Cyprus Right to sufficient details of criminal charge Interpretation by reference to jurisprudence of European Commission of Human Rights Test to be applied The law of Cyprus.

Summary: The facts.Kannas was convicted by the District Court of Famagusta on 11 November 1967 on two counts of causing the deaths of two persons by careless driving. Both counts had charged Kannas with causing death unintentionally by a careless act, not amounting to culpable negligence, to wit, by careless driving. Kannas appealed against conviction on the ground, inter alia, that the particulars of the two counts were insufficiently detailed. It was submitted on his behalf that, since Article 12 (5) (a) of the Cyprus Constitution provided that every person charged with an offence had the right to be informed promptly and in a language which he understands and in detail of the nature and grounds of the charge preferred against him, it was necessary not only to state in the charge that Kannas had driven carelessly, but also to give details of the careless driving.

Held: that the appeal must fail. Article 12 (5) (a) was in every material respect similar to Article 6 (3) (a) of the European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, which since its ratification formed part of the law of Cyprus, and provided that everyone charged with a criminal offence had the right to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusations against him. In interpreting Article 12 (5) (a) of the Constitution it was consequently useful to bear in mind the relevant jurisprudence of the European Commission of Human Rights. After examining this jurisprudence, the Court formulated the following test: In deciding if a charge is sufficiently detailed, what has to be examined is whether or not an accused person has been deprived, through the omission from the charge of any element, of the possibility of adequately preparing his defence; and in this connection regard must be had to any circumstances showing that such accused person had in fact knowledge of the essential elements of the offence with which he was charged. (See p. 363, below.)

The following is the judgment of the Court:

Per Triantafyllides J.: The appellant was convicted by the District Court of Famagusta, on 11 November 1967, for causing the death of two persons by careless driving on 25 April 1967.

The charge-sheet contained two counts, both under section 210 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154, each count in respect of the death of the person...