Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)10[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Krumpel and Krumpelová against the Slovak Republic
(Application No. 56195/00, judgment of 5 July 2005, final on 5 October 2005)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention” and “the Court”);
Having regard to the judgment in these cases, transmitted once it had become final by the Court to the Committee on 5 October 2005;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the excessive length of certain criminal proceedings (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1), (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with the Slovak Republic's obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;
Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee's Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicants the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgment, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of
- individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- general measures preventing similar violations;
Having examined the measures taken by the respondent state to that effect, the details of which appear in the Appendix;
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and DECIDES to close its examination.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)10
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Krumpel and Krumpelová against the Slovak Republic
Introductory case summary
This case concerns the excessive length of certain criminal proceedings to which the applicants were civil parties (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1). The proceedings began in 1991 and were still pending before the first- instance court when the European Court delivered its judgment (a period of 13 years and more than 2 months falls within the European Court's jurisdiction).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Total
Paid on
10 000 €
10 000 €
05/12/2005
b) Individual measures
At present the proceedings are pending before the Supreme Court. The attention of the Supreme Court has been drawn to the European Court's findings with a view to accelerating the proceedings as far as possible.
II.General measures
Constitutional reform introducing an effective remedy against the excessive length of proceedings
As from 1 January 2002, the Constitution of the Slovak Republic was amended to allow individuals and legal persons to complain about alleged violations of their right to have their cases tried without unjustified delay. The Constitutional Court has also been given the power to order the competent authority to proceed with a given case without delay and to grant adequate pecuniary compensation in case of excessive length of judicial proceedings (Article 127, as amended in 2002).
The European Court has already found on several occasions that, having regard to the Constitutional Court's practice in this field (see below), this new constitutional remedy represents an effective remedy in the sense of Article 13 of the Convention (see decisions on the admissibility in the case of Hody, of 6 May 2003, Paška, of 3 December 2002 and Andrášik and others, of 22 October 2002).
Legislative measures to accelerate criminal proceedings
A new Code of Criminal Procedure entered into force on 1 January 2006. Its most important provisions aimed at accelerating of criminal proceedings are as follows:
- the maximum duration of pre-trial detention is limited to 4 years, instead of 5 years under the old Code (Article 71 of the new code). Accordingly, the duration of the pre-trial detention at the preliminary investigation stage may not exceed 2 years, which will stimulate investigation bodies to deal with cases promptly;
- a single judge is competent to decide on placing and keeping an accused in pre-trial detention, as well as to authorise searches, telephone monitoring or other procedural acts during the preliminary investigation stage;
- a shortened procedure was introduced for cases of offences detected immediately after commission (Article 204);
- the possibilities for remittal of a case to the first instance have been limited. The appeal court decides on the merits in all cases, except when gathering of new evidence appears to be particularly difficult;
- the rules governing summonses and communication of documents, which used to cause delays in the criminal proceedings, have been reformed (Articles 88 and 277, paragraph 4);
- a new way of communication of the first instance decisions and new time-limit of 15 days for lodging an appeal against these decisions have been introduced in order to reduce the length of proceedings at this stage of their examination (Article 309);
- an additional remedy allowing complaints against the length of proceedings has been introduced. Interested parties may lodge a complaint with the judge competent to rule on the merits of the case, requesting acceleration of the proceedings. Within 15 days the judge must indicate procedural measures to be taken and the time-limits foreseen for them. If the complainant does not agree with the decision, the request must be sent to the superior court which may give binding instructions to the lower court as regards the acts to be carried out and the time-limits for these acts (Articles 55 and 327, paragraph 1).
Statistical data
Between 2002 and 2005, the average length of the criminal proceedings resulting in convictions was between 4.02 and 5.78 months before the first instance courts and between 23.51 and 28.20 before appeal courts (from the beginning of the proceedings before the instance in question until the decision on the merits).
Publication and dissemination
The judgment of the European Court was published in Justičná revue, No. 10/2005. With a view to facilitating the development of the direct effect of the Convention and the case-law of the European Court in Slovak law, the Minister of Justice sent this judgment, accompanied by a circular letter, to all Presidents of regional criminal courts, inviting them to send it out to all competent juges in order to avoid similar violations in future.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 February 2007 at the 987th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy