INTRODUCTION

An opportunity for adequate defence preparation is essential if an effective response to the charge is to be mounted at hearing. The realisation of such an opportunity requires crucially that the accused be afforded ‘adequate time and facilities’ as guaranteed in Article 6(3)(b). One may infer from the standard of ‘adequate’ an acknowledgement that the time and facilities reasonably required in each particular case are variable by context. The degree of time and facilities provided in one case will not be enough necessarily to mount an effective defence in another which differs in seriousness of offence, complexity and difficulty. The inherent nature of time and facilities is such that Article 6(3)(b) is the most farreaching and flexible provision of the Article 6(3) catalogue. Its non-observance is capable of placing the accused in a position of procedural disadvantage visa- vis the prosecution, which has access to considerable state resources to aid its preparation.

Article 6(3)(b) is, accordingly, a facet of concern for the concept of equality of arms, section 2 of this chapter defining the nexus between them. The concern of the discussion thereafter is the Strasbourg approach to this concept in determinations on adequacy of time and facilities. It begins in section 3 by examining the right to adequate time with a particular emphasis on the key matters taken into account when it is applied at Strasbourg. It is not, however, complaints of inadequate time that predominate Article 6(3)(b) jurisprudence. Attracting greater regard is the right to adequate facilities, which is dealt with in section 4. Though it briefly provides examples of several facilities considered necessary for securing equality of arms, the facility of disclosure is the most prominent in the case-law and thus predominates the discussion in the section. The character of disclosure is outlined, which addresses questions of what must be disclosed, the timing of disclosure and who disclosure must be made to. This serves as a useful prelude to discussing the Court's approach to the concept of equality of arms as applied to issues of disclosure.