CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 5 mars 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5FFF0A77 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:1pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9F46BEC9 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s68D1564D { width:34.89pt; display:inline-block } .s543FF837 { width:151.1pt; display:inline-block } .s5D826FD4 { width:25.88pt; display:inline-block } .s1B61D60 { width:156.43pt; display:inline-block }     FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 26132/20 Paweł CZARNIECKI against Poland   The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 5   March   2024 as a Committee composed of:   Lətif Hüseynov , President ,   Krzysztof Wojtyczek,   Ivana Jelić , judges , and Liv Tigerstedt, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to: the application (no.   26132/20) against the Republic of Poland lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 18 June 2020 by a Polish national, Mr Paweł Czarniecki (“the applicant”), who was born in 1992, is detained in Cieszanów and was represented by Mr E. Głąb, a lawyer practising in Rzeszów; the decision to give notice of the application to the Polish Government (“the Government”), represented by their Agent, Mr J. Sobczak, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the parties’ observations; Having deliberated, decides as follows: SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE 1.     The application concerns two strip searches the applicant had to undergo on 9 December 2018 while detained in Uherce Mineralne Prison. 2 .     The applicant considered the searches unjustified and requested a criminal investigation into the events. 3.     The prosecution service initially refused. After the applicant’s interlocutory appeal, on 10 June 2019 the Lesko District Court quashed the impugned decision and ordered that the investigation be conducted. 4 .     The investigation, launched following the District Court’s decision, was discontinued on 31 July 2019 due to the lack of statutory features of a criminal offence. The applicant lodged an interlocutory appeal, but the Lesko District Court upheld the impugned decision on 9 December 2019. 5.     The applicant essentially complained, under Article 3 of the Convention, that the allegedly unjustified strip searches constituted degrading treatment and, under Article 8, that they violated his right to respect for his private life. THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT 6.     The Court notes that the Government objected to the application on various grounds, including its allegedly premature and manifestly ill-founded character. The Court does not need to rule separately on these objections of the Government, as the present application is in any event inadmissible for the following reasons. 7.     The Government submitted that the applicant had omitted to inform the Court of new, important facts, which amounted to an abuse of the right of application. 8.     Namely, on 23 April 2021 the applicant lodged a civil claim for compensation against the State Treasury – the Uherce Mineralne Prison Governor. He claimed 76,000 Polish zlotys on account of alleged violation of his personal rights by various aspects of his detention, in particular by the alleged abuse of strip searches by the prison guards. The applicant did not specify, in the statement of claim, the exact dates of the impugned searches, but indicated that they had taken place “after January 2016”. The proceedings regarding this claim seem to be pending before the Krosno Regional Court. 9.     The general principles concerning the rejection of an application on grounds of abuse of the right of individual application have been summarised in Gross v. Switzerland ([GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014). In particular, the Court emphasises that an application may be rejected as an abuse of the right of application where new, important developments have occurred during the proceedings before the Court and where, despite being expressly required to do so by Rule 47 § 7 of the Rules of Court, the applicant has failed to disclose that information to the Court, thereby preventing it from ruling on the case in full knowledge of the facts ( ibid .). 10.     The Court notes that, in the present case, neither the applicant himself who, in December 2021 notified the Court of his release from prison, nor his lawyer, who is representing him both in the relevant domestic proceedings and before the Court, have submitted any information about the ongoing civil proceedings. 11.     In response to the Government’s submissions, the applicant claimed that the total number of strip searches indicated in his civil claim had not included the searches carried out on 9 December 2018. 12.     The Court cannot accept the above explanation for two reasons. First, none of the documents submitted by either party indicate the exact dates of searches on which the applicant relied in his domestic civil claim, leading to the conclusion that the claim covers all strip searches which occurred from January 2016 until the date of its introduction. Second, in the statement of claim the applicant requested the Regional Court to include, in the case file, the file of the criminal investigation launched at the applicant’s request (see paragraphs   2-4 above), for the purposes of proving the “methods of conducting personal checks” in prison. It indicates that the applicant wished to rely, in the domestic civil proceedings, on the same events which gave rise to his application lodged with the Court. 13.     Therefore, the Court finds that the applicant has not furnished a plausible explanation for the failure to inform it of the fact that he had applied for compensation ten months after lodging the case with the Court. 14.     The Court further finds that the fact of initiating domestic civil proceedings concerning the same events which served as the basis for the application lodged with the Court concerns the very core of the case pending before it. 15.     Having regard to the importance of the information at issue for the proper determination of the present case, the Court finds that such conduct on the part of the applicant and his representative was contrary to the purpose of the right of individual application and amounted to an abuse of that right within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention. The application must therefore be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Declares the application inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 28 March 2024.     Liv Tigerstedt   Lətif Hüseynov   Deputy Registrar   President