FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 40759/05
by Karol MARTINKA
against Slovakia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 19 May 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Giovanni Bonello,
David Thór Björgvinsson,
Ján Šikuta,
Päivi Hirvelä,
Ledi Bianku,
Nebojša Vučinić, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 October 2005,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Karol Martinka, is a Slovak national who was born in 1956 and lives in Vienna. He was represented before the Court by Mr T. Plank, a lawyer practising in Bratislava. The Slovak Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs M. Pirošíková.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
1. Criminal proceedings against the applicant
In April 1999 criminal proceedings were instituted against the applicant. The charges against him were modified several times. On 30 November 2000 the applicant was indicted to stand trial.
On 14 September 2001 the Bratislava Regional Court remitted the case to the Regional Prosecutor’s Office for further investigation. On 28 August 2002 the Supreme Court dismissed the Regional Prosecutor’s complaint in this respect.
In the period covered by the Constitutional Court’s judgment of 28 February 2006 (see below) the proceedings were still pending in their pre-trial stage.
2. Constitutional proceedings
On 3 May 2004 the applicant turned to the Constitutional Court which, on 28 February 2006, found that the Ministry of the Interior through its Office for the Investigation of Serious Crimes - Justice Police and the Bratislava Regional Prosecutor’s Office had violated the applicant’s right to a hearing without unjustified delay.
The Constitutional Court ordered the above-mentioned authorities to avoid further delays and to reimburse the applicant’s legal costs. It did not award the applicant any just satisfaction.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings.
THE LAW
On 6 April 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Marica Pirošíková, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of the Slovak Republic offer to pay ex gratia the sum of EUR 6,639 (six thousand six hundred and thirty nine euros) to Mr Karol Martinka with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”
On 6 April 2009 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I, Karol Martinka, the applicant, note that the Government of the Slovak Republic are prepared to pay me ex gratia the sum of EUR 6,639 (six thousand six hundred and thirty nine euros) with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Slovakia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”
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 reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Lawrence EarlyNicolas Bratza
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy