"The state's power to prosecute a person has a lot of power within it. The significance of the right to a fair trial is, in essence, that where the state wishes to make use of this power, it must do so within the framework of a proper proceeding, in which the justification for the violation of the defendant's basic freedoms will be examined. Therefore, the existence of fair proceedings is not only a purpose in itself, but also a means intended to serve the public interest in doing justice and exposing the truth. Moreover, a fair trial is supposed to ensure the defendant the protection of the "general" human rights given to every person, wherever he is....Therefore, in order for a proceeding to be considered fair, it is required to meet various criteria, with which we enumerate the demand for neutrality and impartiality on the part of those sitting in the court; the transparency and publicity of the legal process; the conduct of the proceeding within a reasonable period of time; protection of the presumption of innocence and the right to confidentiality from self-incrimination; Protecting the defendant's right to present evidence of his innocence, to obtain the prosecution's evidence, and to cross-examine its witnesses; The right of a suspect or defendant to know about the existence of investigation and trial proceedings conducted against him, etc.The right to a fair trial does not only fulfill the personal interest of the suspect or defendant on trial. It is in the public interest that every individual in the company – as a potential defendant – know that if and when criminal proceedings are held against him, they will conduct themselves in a proper and fair manner.....What emerges from this is that the right to a fair trial is like an act of joining. It is not summarized in a specific procedural arrangement or a specific right, but rather bases itself on a combination of means, procedural arrangements and substantive rights that coexist."
(Emphasis added - M.A.C.)