including, inter alia, right to be informed promptly, and in detail of the nature and cause of the accusations against him as well as the right to access all relevant information pertaining to the accusation. The appropriate rights to be triggered by any criminal charge depends on the nature of the charge and the mode of trial anticipated. In the instant case, having regard to the nature of impeachment trial, the minimum rights to be accorded the Applicant, obviously involved the attendance and presence of the Applicant at the impeachment proceedings where the allegations against him were to be investigated and charges framed for the trial by the Senate. It is worth noting that the evidence to be used against the Applicant at the trial by the Senate was obtained and compiled at the impeachment stage before they were presented to the Senate. 107. In the 9154/10 CASE | OF SCHATSCHASCHWILI JUDGMENT (MERITS V. AND GERMANY JUST SATISFACTION) | COURT (GRAND CHAMBER) | 15/12/2015, the European Court of Human Rights dealing with how assessment of fairness of a trial is to be done, held that: “The Court’s primary concern under Article 6 § 1 is to evaluate the overall fairness of the criminal proceedings. In making this assessment, the Court will look at the proceedings as a whole, including the way in which the evidence was obtained, having regard to the rights of the defence” 108. On the importance of the investigation stage in criminal trial, the Court further held that: 42