Section 653. Procedures for the Removal of a Conviction
(1) Matters regarding the removal of a conviction shall be examined by a judge of the district (city) court according to the place of residence of the person who has served a sentence, if a request of such person, or the defence counsel or lawful representative thereof, has been received.
(2) A court shall notify a prosecutor regarding a received request.
(3) If the matter is examined in the oral procedure, the participation in a court hearing of the person in relation to whom a request regarding removal of conviction is being examined is mandatory. Such person has the right to defence. The non-arrival of the prosecutor to the court hearing shall not be an impediment to examination of the matter regarding removal of conviction. Examination of a matter regarding removal of conviction shall commence with the reading of a request. Following such reading, a judge shall hear the views of summoned persons and take a decision in the deliberation room.
(4) [19 November 2020]
(5) If a request regarding the removal of a conviction has been rejected, such request may be resubmitted not earlier than six months after the day when the decision was taken on rejection of such request.
(6) A court decision in a matter on removal of a conviction may be appealed on regarding the non-observance of the procedural requirements specified in this Section.
Section 655. Grounds for the Renewal of Criminal Proceedings in connection with Newly Disclosed
Circumstances
(1) Criminal proceedings wherein a valid court judgment or decision, or prosecutor's penal order, exists may be renewed in connection with newly disclosed circumstances.
1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that:
(a) New evidence has been discovered that:
(i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and
(ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict;
(b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified;
(c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46.
2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate:
(a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber;
(b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised.