DRAGOJEVIĆ v. CROATIA JUDGMENT II. ALLEGED VIOLATIONS CONVENTION OF ARTICLE 6 29 § 1 OF THE 103. The applicant complained of the lack of impartiality of the trial bench and the use of evidence obtained by secret surveillance in the criminal proceedings against him. He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which, in so far as relevant, reads: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by [a] ... tribunal ...” A. Alleged lack of impartiality of the trial bench 1. Admissibility (a) The parties’ submissions 104. The Government submitted that during the proceedings the applicant had never complained about the composition of the trial bench nor had he ever requested that Judge Z.Č. be disqualified from sitting in the case. Moreover, he had not alleged a lack of impartiality of the trial bench in his appeal but only in the constitutional complaint. Thus, in the Government’s view, it could not be said that the alleged lack of impartiality of Judge Z.Č. had affected the applicant’s right to a fair trial. 105. The applicant pointed out that, in view of the Supreme Court’s decision dismissing the request of the President of the Dubrovnik County Court for the proceedings to be transferred to another court on account of the previous involvement of the judges of that court in the case (see paragraph 40 above), any possibility of complaining about the trial bench’s lack of impartiality had been purely theoretical and would not have yielded any result in practice. (b) The Court’s assessment 106. The Court notes that after Judge Z.Č. had expressed his concerns about an appearance of his impartiality in the applicant’s case to the President of the Dubrovnik County Court and asked to withdraw from the case (see paragraph 38 above), the latter requested permission from the Supreme Court to have the proceedings transferred to another court since all the judges of the Dubrovnik County Court had already been involved in the applicant’s case at earlier stages of the proceedings (see paragraph 39 above). However, the Supreme Court dismissed that request as it did not see any reason to doubt the impartiality of the Dubrovnik County Court judges. 107. In such circumstances any other complaint by the applicant about the composition of the trial bench or a lack of impartiality of the Dubrovnik County Court judges would have been theoretical and illusory, whereas the Convention is intended to guarantee rights which are practical and effective