Communicated on 15 January 2019
FOURTH SECTION
Applications nos. 42917/16 and 44103/16
Leonard ZĂICESCU and Ana FĂLTICINEANU against Romania
and Liviu BERIS and Association of the Romanian Jews - Victims of the Holocaust (AERVH) against Romania
lodged on 14 July 2016 and 15 July 2016 respectively
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES
The applications concern the alleged lack of access to a court in order to challenge the result of proceedings finalised in 1995, 1998 and 1999 by judgments of the Supreme Court of Justice in which several public officials and journalists have been acquitted (by way of extraordinary appeals lodged by the prosecutor after final convictions) for crimes against humanity committed against the Jewish community in Romania between 1941 and 1942.
The applicants (three survivors of the Holocaust in Romania and a non‑governmental organisation defending the rights of the victims of the Holocaust in Romania) claim that they became aware of the above proceedings on the occasion of a conference held on 26 January 2016 organised by the National Institute for the Study of the Holocaust in Romania.
In March 2016 they requested access to the criminal files, which are currently in the custody of the National Council for the Study of the Archives of the Securitate (CNSAS). However, they were denied access to the files which have been classified as secret.
The applicants complain that, as a result of this denial, they are prevented from preparing and lodging requests for the re-opening of the criminal proceedings in question, in order to find out the truth about a traumatising period of their lives and unveil the discrimination to which they have been subjected.
QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES
1. In the light of their allegations that the judgments nos. 17/1995, 21/1998 and 35/1999, adopted by the Supreme Court of Justice on the extraordinary appeals concerning convictions for crimes against humanity committed between 1941 and 1942, breached their rights under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, can the applicants, Jewish survivors of those events, claim to be victims of these violations of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 34?
2. If so, were the proceedings finalised by the judgments nos. 17/1995, 21/1998 and 35/1999 in compliance with the procedural requirements of Article 3 of the Convention?
3. Did the applicants suffer discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights as a result of the adoption of the judgments nos. 17/1995, 21/1998 and 35/1999, contrary to Article 14 read in conjunction with Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention and contrary to Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the Convention?
4. Was the authorities’ refusal to grant the applicants access to the files concerning the proceedings finalised by the judgments nos. 17/1995, 21/1998 and 35/1999 compatible with the applicants’ right of access to a court within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?
5. Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their private life, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention due to the authorities’ refusal to grant them access to the files in question?
If so, was that interference in compliance with the requirements of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention?
Appendix
Application No.
First name LASTNAME
Birth year/Date of registration
Nationality
Place of residence
Representative
42917/16
Leonard ZĂICESCU
Ana FĂLTICINEANU
1927
1929
Romanian
Bucharest
G. Iorgulescu, a lawyer practising in Bucharest
44103/16
Liviu BERIS
Association of the Romanian Jews - Victims of the Holocaust (AERVH)
1928
1990
Romanian
Bucharest
G. Iorgulescu, a lawyer practising in Bucharest
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy