FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 37421/04
by Ramiz BOJAGIĆ
against Croatia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 23 October 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
MrL. Loucaides, President,
MrsN. Vajić,
MrA. Kovler,
MrK. Hajiyev,
MrD. Spielmann,
MrS.E. Jebens,
MrG. Malinverni, judges,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 25 August 2004,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Ramiz Bojagić, is a national of Bosnia and Herzegovina who was born in 1977 and is presently serving his prison sentence in Lepoglava State prison. He was represented before the Court by Mr Z. Bektić, a lawyer practising in Živinice. The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs Š. Stažnik.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
Following the instigation of criminal proceedings against the applicant, on charges of two counts of attempted aggravated murder, on 31 January 2001 before the Vukovar County Court (Županijski sud u Vukovaru), the applicant was apprehended and placed in pre-trial detention 24 August 2001 in Osijek Prison.
The Vukovar County Court judgment of 19 May 2004, finding the applicant guilty as charged and sentencing him to ten years’ imprisonment, was upheld by the Supreme Court (Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske) on 28 September 2004.
Meanwhile, the applicant filed a criminal report with the Vukovar County Court alleging that on 1 April 2002 he had been beaten up by the prison policemen.
The applicant was seen by a doctor on 3 April 2002 who found contusions on both sides of the applicant’s thorax. The left-side contusion measured 6x3 cm and the one on the right-side measured 15x10 cm. The applicant had further contusions on both sides of his arms measuring 5x7 cm. The applicant was also subjected to an X-ray examination of his chest and diagnosed as suffering from multiple contusions of his chest and left arm dating from two days ago.
The prison administration filed a report with the Vukovar County Court stating that on 1 April 2002 the applicant during the outside after-noon walk had ignored the prison guards’ warnings to put his feet off a seat which resulted in his walk being interrupted. He had been obliged to return to his cell. The injuries complained of by the applicant had been the result of “a game between the inmates”.
Subsequently, no steps were taken in respect of the applicant’s allegations.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant firstly complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the ill-treatment inflicted on him by the guards of the Osijek County Prison and the lack of an effective investigation into such a treatment.
He further complained, without invoking any provisions of the Convention, about the duration of his detention on remand.
Finally, the applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the criminal proceedings against him.
THE LAW
By letter of 13 July 2007 the Government informed the Court that they accepted the proposal for a friendly settlement and that the Government would pay the applicant 6,000 euros in full and final settlement of his claims under the Convention, costs and expenses included.
By letter of 6 September 2007 the applicant informed the Court that he had accepted the proposal for a friendly settlement whereby the applicant waived any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts of the present application.
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Søren NielsenLoukis Loucaides
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy