Published on 24 January 2022
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 18678/18
Mitko PESHOV against North Macedonia
and 2 other applications
(see list appended)
communicated on 4 January 2022
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applications concern pre-trial detention and related review proceedings in respect of the applicants who were charged with terrorism (brought also against other co-accused) in connection to an incident of 27 April 2017 when a large group of protesters entered the Parliament building (in the incident several members of Parliament, police officers and journalists were injured and material damage was caused).
With a decision of 30 November 2017 a three-judge panel of the Skopje Court of First Instance (“the trial court”) allowed an appeal by the prosecutor (allegedly served on the first applicant’s lawyer on 1 December 2017) and replaced an initial order for house arrest of the first applicant (a former commanding police officer) with an order for his detention in prison. All orders for his pre-trial detention (including extension orders of 27 December 2017, 26 January, 23 February and 27 March 2018) were justified with the risk of absconding and interfering with the investigation and were based on the serious nature of the alleged offence, political background of the alleged crime, severity of the potential penalty, as well as the risk that he might influence witnesses and hide evidence. It took twenty-two days for the Skopje Court of Appeal to examine the applicant’s appeal against the extension order of 26 January 2018. With a judgment of 26 March 2018, the Supreme Court placed the first applicant under a house arrest.
On a request by the prosecutor of 27 November 2017 a pre-trial judge of the trial court ordered pre-trial detention of the second applicant (a former member of Parliament) (order dated 5 December 2017). On 27 December 2017 the detention was extended for thirty days. The second applicant’s appeals against the orders were dismissed on 12 December 2017 and 15 January 2018, respectively. No information was submitted whether the second applicant is still in detention.
The third applicant (a former Minister and Deputy Minister) was arrested on 20 February 2019 on reasonable suspicion that he had coordinated the events of 27 April 2017. He was remanded in custody on account of risk of absconding and interfering with the investigation. As from 31 May 2019 the applicant was placed under a house arrest solely due to the risk of absconding. Between 28 June 2019 and 21 August 2020 the applicant’s house arrest was extended on fourteen occasions on the same ground which was justified with the serious nature of the alleged offence, severity of the potential penalty, as well as the risk that he might influence witnesses and hide or destroy evidence. It took between twenty-one and twenty-seven days for the Skopje Court of Appeal to examine the applicant’s appeals against the extension orders of 26 August and 25 December 2019, as well as the order of 23 July 2020. It appears that he is still in house arrest.
The applicants complain under Article 5 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention about lack of reasons for their pre-trial detention, lack of adversarial proceedings and non-compliance with the “speedy” requirement.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
I. Common questions in respect of the first and third applicants (applications nos. 18678/18 and 19821/20):
1. Was the extension of the first applicant’s detention in prison, on the one hand, and the third applicant’s house arrest between 30 July 2019 and 21 August 2020, on the other hand, compatible with Article 5 § 3 of the Convention? In particular, were the grounds given by the courts “sufficient” within the meaning of this provision (see Merabishvili v. Georgia [GC], no. 72508/13, §§ 222-35, 28 November 2017; Miladinov and Others v the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, nos. 46398/09, 50570/09 and 50576/09, 24 April 2014; and Vasilkoski and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 28169/08, 28 October 2010)?
2. Were the review proceedings before the Skopje Court of Appeal regarding the extension order of 26 January 2018 (concerning the first applicant), as well as the orders of 26 August and 25 December 2019 and 23 July 2020 (concerning the third applicant), compatible with the “speedy” requirement within the meaning of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see Rehbock v. Slovenia, no. 29462/95, § 84, ECHR 2000‑XII)?
II. Questions in respect of the first applicant (application no. 18678/18)
3. Was the procedure before the trial court in respect of the decision of 30 November 2017 and the subsequent appeal, compatible with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? In particular, was the panel required to hold an oral hearing when replacing the initial house arrest with detention in prison (see Mitreski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 11621/09, 25 March 2010)? In addition, was the applicant able to effectively participate in those proceedings given the alleged belated communication of the prosecutor’s appeal?
II. Questions in respect of the second applicant (application no. 27509/18):
4. Was the procedure regarding the second applicant’s pre-trial detention adversarial in conformity with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? In particular, was the prosecutor’s request for his initial detention of 27 November 2017 and any supporting documents, communicated to the applicant? In addition, were the prosecutor’s written submissions in reply to the applicant’s appeals, if any, communicated to the applicant (see Miladinov and Others v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, nos. 46398/09, 50570/09 and 50576/09, 24 April 2014)?
III. Were the review proceedings before the Skopje Court of Appeal adversarial in conformity within the meaning of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? In particular, were the prosecutor’s written submissions in reply to the applicant’s appeals challenging the orders for his house arrest issued in the period between 30 July 2019 and 21 August 2020 indicated above, if any, communicated to the applicant?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Case name
Lodged on
Applicant
Year of Birth
Place of Residence
Nationality
Represented by
1.
18678/18
Peshov v. North Macedonia
12/04/2018
Mitko PESHOV
1976
Kavadarci
Macedonian / citizen of the Republic North Macedonia
Pavlina ZEFIKJ
2.
27509/18
Vasilevski v. North Macedonia
06/06/2018
Sasho VASILEVSKI
1966
Ohrid
Macedonian / citizen of the Republic North Macedonia
Aleksandar GODJO
3.
19821/20
Ristovski v. North Macedonia
13/05/2020
Spiro RISTOVSKI
1981
Skopje
Macedonian / citizen of the Republic North Macedonia
Aneta ILIEVSKA