AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application No. 25086/94
by Bronislawa PROSZAK
against Poland
The European Commission of Human Rights (Second Chamber) sitting
in private on 17 January 1995, the following members being present:
Mr. H. DANELIUS, President
Mrs. G.H. THUNE
MM. G. JÖRUNDSSON
S. TRECHSEL
J.-C. SOYER
H.G. SCHERMERS
F. MARTINEZ
L. LOUCAIDES
J.-C. GEUS
M.A. NOWICKI
I. CABRAL BARRETO
J. MUCHA
D. SVÁBY
Mr. K. ROGGE, Secretary to the Chamber
Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection
of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 28 April 1994 by
Bronislawa PROSZAK against Poland and registered on 6 September 1994
under file No. 25086/94;
Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules
of Procedure of the Commission;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The facts of the case as submitted by the applicant may be
summarised as follows:
The applicant, a Polish citizen born in 1926, is a pensioner
residing in Stalowa Wola.
I.
In 1985 the applicant's son died. The investigations into the
causes of his death were eventually terminated as no criminal offence
had been committed.
On 13 May 1986 the psychiatrist B. M. issued a medical
certificate that the applicant suffered from schizophrenia.
On 12 February 1992 the Ministry of Justice informed the
applicant that an investigation relating to the medical certificate
issued in 1986 would be undertaken.
On 22 June 1992 the Ministry of Justice informed the applicant
that investigations into the causes of her son's death would be
resumed. On 3 August 1992 the Stalowa Wola District Prosecutor resumed
investigations and on 31 December 1992 decided to terminate them as it
had been established that no criminal offence had been committed. The
applicant unsuccessfully appealed against this decision.
On 23 April 1993 the applicant requested the Minister of Justice
to reopen criminal proceedings concerning the death of her son.
On 30 September 1993 the Tarnobrzeg Regional Prosecutor confirmed
the refusal to institute criminal proceedings relating to the death of
the applicant's son.
II.
On 20 December 1988 the applicant was assaulted and beaten by her
neighbour R.T. On 29 November 1989 the Stalowa Wola District Court
(S*d Rejonowy w Stalowej Woli) convicted the latter of assault and
causing bodily harm and sentenced him to six months' imprisonment. On
12 March 1990 the Tarnobrzeg Regional Court (S*d Wojewódzki w
Tarnobrzegu) decided to discontinue the proceedings by virtue of the
Amnesty Act.
On 25 October 1990 the applicant filed a civil action with the
Stalowa Wola District Court against R.T. claiming compensation of five
million zloty for damage resulting from the assault. At an unspecified
later date she increased her claim.
On 23 February 1993 the applicant underwent a psychiatric
examination ordered by the Stalowa Wola District Court for the purposes
of the civil proceedings for compensation.
On 8 June 1993 the Court held a hearing in the civil proceedings
and heard a psychiatrist as an expert.
On 18 June 1993 the applicant refused to undergo a further
psychiatric examination. She contended that there were sufficient
documents in the case-file relating to her mental health as she had
already been examined by psychiatrists at least twice in the course of
the proceedings. She pointed out that she did not understand how a
further psychiatric examination of the victim of the assault could be
useful for the determination of the civil liability of the defender.
On 7 September 1993 the applicant informed the Court that she had
been unable to attend a hearing on 2 September 1993 for health reasons
and submitted a medical certificate to this effect. She also
complained about the length of the proceedings.
Subsequently the applicant complained to the President of the
Stalowa Wola District Court about the prolongation of the proceedings.
On 18 October 1993 the President informed her that this was in part due
to her refusal to undergo a further medical examination. He found no
indications of lack of diligence on the part of the Court.
On 26 October 1993 the applicant complained to the Minister of
Justice about the length of the proceedings. She submitted that the
President of the Court had failed to reply to three of her complaints.
She challenged the judge claiming that she had not diligently dealt
with the case and was biased against the applicant. On 2 November 1993
the Ministry transmitted this letter to the President of the Tarnobrzeg
Regional Court.
On 16 November 1993 the applicant requested to be examined by a
psychiatrist specialised in the syndrome of former prisoners of the
German concentration camps as she had been imprisoned in Ravensbrück
during the Second World War.
Subsequently the applicant formally challenged the judge on the
grounds that the proceedings exceeded a reasonable time.
On 10 March 1994 the District Court in Stalowa Wola dismissed the
applicant's challenge of the judge as lacking a basis in law.
The applicant apparently appealed against this decision, but her
appeal was rejected as not complying with the formal requirements.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains that the length of the civil proceedings
exceeds a reasonable time as no complex issues are involved. She
contends that there were several periods of inactivity in the
proceedings; that the Court is unable to determine the steps to be
taken and that there is therefore no progress in the proceedings at
least since September 1993. The applicant relies on Article 6 of the
Convention.
She complains that the medical certificate issued in 1986 ruined
her reputation and caused her inconveniences and annoyance.
She further complains that the Ministry of Justice refused to
reopen the criminal proceedings concerning the death of her son.
The applicant alleges that she is persecuted by her former
husband and his wife, her neighbours and other persons.
The applicant does not invoke any particular provision of the
Convention.
THE LAW
1. The applicant complains that the medical certificate issued in
1986 ruined her reputation and resulted in inconveniences and
annoyance.
The Commission recalls that Poland recognised the competence of
the Commission to receive individual applications "from any person,
non-governmental organisation or group of individual claiming to be a
victim of a violation by Poland of the rights recognised in the
Convention through any act, decision or event occurring after
30 April 1993".
It follows that this part of the application is outside the
competence ratione temporis of the Commission and therefore
incompatible with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning
of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2).
2. The applicant complains that the Public Prosecutor refused to
reopen the criminal proceedings concerning the death of her son.
However, the Convention does not guarantee a right to have criminal
proceedings instituted or reopened against third parties. This
complaint is therefore incompatible ratione materiae with the
Convention within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the
Convention.
3. The applicant alleges that she is persecuted by her former
husband and his wife, her neighbours and other persons. As these
complaints concern private persons, it follows that they are
incompatible ratione personae with the Convention within the meaning
of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.
4. The applicant finally complains about the length of the civil
proceedings which were instituted in October 1990 and which are still
pending before the first instance court. The Commission, which has
examined this complaint under Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the
Convention, considers that it cannot, on the basis of the file, decide
on this complaint without the observations of both parties.
The Commission therefore considers that this part of the
application must be adjourned.
For these reasons, the Commission unanimously
DECIDES TO ADJOURN the examination of the applicant's complaint
concerning the length of the civil proceedings;
DECLARES INADMISSIBLE the remainder of the application.
Secretary to the Second Chamber President of the Second Chamber
(K. ROGGE) (H. DANELIUS)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy