Примеры использования To prepare his defence на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Therefore, he had enough time to prepare his defence.
As a result, his right to prepare his defence and to a fair hearing on the charges raised against him is and will be violated.
He was not given sufficient time to prepare his defence.
Furthermore, the author claims that he was unable to prepare his defence properly, because he was not in a position to read the hundreds of documents placed before the Court.
The accused may request more time to prepare his defence.
Nor did he have adequate time to prepare his defence, since his arrest and prosecution began the day after his arrival in the country on 10 September 2006.
He contends that he had inadequate time to prepare his defence.
The right to have sufficient time and opportunity to prepare his defence and communicate with a defence attorney he has chosen;
The author further contends that he had insufficient time to prepare his defence.
Finally, the author alleges that he was not able to prepare his defence properly in the circumstances of his detention.
Over the next six weeks the author was provided legal counsel to prepare his defence.
He therefore alleges that he was denied the opportunity to prepare his defence, whereas the Prosecution had some 28 months to prepare its case.
The State party further refutes the author's claim that he did not have sufficient time to prepare his defence.
The author has further claimed that he had not sufficient time to prepare his defence, in violation of article 14, paragraph 3(b), of the Covenant.
The delay of several months in transferring him from Cameroon did not prejudice his ability to prepare his defence.
The Government refutes the allegation that Mr. Kaddar was denied the right to prepare his defence and to communicate with an attorney of his choosing.
Before the trial, Mr. Puracal was denied his right to meet with a defence attorney in order to prepare his defence.
According to the source,Mr. Malaolu was denied adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence, in clear violation of article 33(6)(b) of the Nigerian Constitution.
In its preliminary observations on the merits,the State party first of all disputes the claim that the author was not given sufficient time to prepare his defence.
With regard to the right to adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence, the source notes that the charges against Pastor Gong were extremely complex.
The author further alleges that he is a victim of a violation of article 14, subparagraphs 3(b) and(d),since he was denied adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence.
The author claims a violation of article 14, paragraph 3(b),because he had inadequate time and facilities to prepare his defence at trial, and inadequate communication with counsel of his choice.
However, he regretted that some of the convictions remained in place, andnew charges and convictions were introduced, with no opportunity for the accused to prepare his defence.
The author claims a violation of article 14, paragraph 3(b),as her son was not allowed sufficient time to prepare his defence, and because he was not offered sufficient time and conditions to meet with his lawyer.
Indeed, the author was able to familiarize himself with the materials of the pretrial investigation after it had been completed, andhad approximately half of year to prepare his defence.
An essential element of this right is that an accused must have adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence, as is reflected in paragraph 3(b) of article 14.
The Committee considers that the author's submissions concerning the time andconditions in which her son was assisted by a lawyer before the trial adversely affected the possibilities of the author's son to prepare his defence.
The author claims to have been the victim of a violation of article 14, paragraph 3(b) of the Covenant,contending that he was not given time to prepare his defence or properly to present to the competent court the grounds on which he opposed the new extradition request.
Between the time of the deposit hearing on 26 January 2001 and the hearing on the merits on 25 May 2001,the author had a four-month period to prepare his defence.
It is further claimed that,prior to the preliminary hearing, the author had inadequate time and facilities to prepare his defence and communicate with his attorney, in violation of article 14, paragraph 3(b), and an inadequate opportunity to examine or procure witnesses, in violation of article 14, paragraph 3 e.