Information Note on the Court’s case-law 183
March 2015
S.Z. v. Bulgaria - 29263/12
Judgment 3.3.2015 [Section IV]
Article 3
Effective investigation
Undue delays in criminal proceedings and failure properly to investigate rape and assault allegations: violation
Article 46
Article 46-2
Execution of judgment
Measures of a general character
Respondent State required to identify and take general measures to improve effectiveness of criminal investigations into allegations of rape and assault
Facts – In September 1999 the applicant was taken to a flat where she was held against her will, beaten and repeatedly raped by a number of men before managing to escape.
A criminal investigation was launched by the prosecution. The applicant identified some of her assailants and two police officers they had allegedly met prior to holding her against her will.
The investigation was closed four times and the case file sent back for further investigation on the grounds that the necessary investigative measures had not been carried out or that procedural irregularities had been committed.
In 2007 seven defendants were committed for trial in the District Court on charges of false imprisonment, rape, incitement to prostitution or abduction for the purposes of coercing into prostitution. Twenty-two hearings were held, about ten of which were adjourned mainly on grounds of irregularities in summoning the accused or witnesses. In a judgment of March 2012, five of the accused were convicted and given prison sentences and fines, one was acquitted and the proceedings against the seventh defendant were discontinued on the grounds that they had become time-barred. The five accused who were convicted and the applicant appealed. Seven hearings before the Regional Court were adjourned on account of the absence of one of the accused or their lawyers. In a final judgment of February 2014, the court set aside one of the convictions and discontinued the proceedings on the grounds that they were time-barred. The prison sentences of some of the other accused were reduced.
Law – Article 3 (procedural aspect): The acts of rape and assault inflicted on the applicant fell within the scope of Article 3 of the Convention.
The total length of the criminal proceedings brought following the applicant’s complaint came to more than fourteen years for the preliminary investigation and two levels of jurisdiction.
That extremely long period did not appear to be justified on grounds of the complexity of the case. The delays incurred had been due to a lack of diligence on the part of the authorities and, among other things, the investigating authorities had failed to investigate certain aspects of the case, particularly the involvement of individuals whom the applicant had identified as having taken part in the assault.
The excessive length of the proceedings had undeniably had negative repercussions on the applicant, who had clearly been in a very vulnerable psychological condition following the assault. She had been left in a state of uncertainty regarding the possibility of securing the trial and punishment of her assailants, had had to return to the court repeatedly and been obliged to relive the events during the many examinations by the court.
Accordingly, the proceedings could not be regarded as having satisfied the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention. Consequently, the Court rejected the Government’s preliminary objection that the application was premature.
Conclusion: violation (unanimous).
Article 46: In more than 45 judgments the Court had already found violations of the obligation to carry out an effective investigation in applications concerning Bulgaria. Moreover, several applications concerning rape cases had recently been struck out of the list following a friendly settlement between the parties or a unilateral declaration by the Government acknowledging a violation of Article 3.
In the majority of those cases the Court had found that there had been substantial delays at the preliminary investigation stage and that no thorough and objective investigation had been carried out. In some situations the delays had resulted in the termination of the proceedings on the grounds that they had become time-barred where the suspects, despite having been identified, had not been formally charged or where, despite the presumed perpetrators being committed for trial and the trial being held, the so-called “absolute” limitation period had expired. Furthermore, in some cases the authorities had not taken account of certain evidence or sought to clarify certain factual circumstances or the involvement of particular individuals in the criminal offence, or the prosecutor had persistently refused to comply with the court’s instructions regarding the preliminary investigation.
Accordingly, there was a systemic problem of ineffectiveness of investigations in Bulgaria. However, the complexity of the structural problem found to exist made it difficult to identify the exact causes of the defects found or to pinpoint specific measures that should be implemented in order to improve the quality of investigations. In those circumstances, the Court did not consider itself to be in a position to indicate which individual and general measures should be implemented for the purposes of executing the present judgment. The national authorities, in cooperation with the Committee of Ministers, were the best placed to identify the various causes of the problem and to decide which general measures were required – in practical terms – as a deterrent to similar future violations, with a view to combating impunity and upholding the rule of law and the trust of the public and victims in the justice system.
Article 41: EUR 15,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.
Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy