CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 octobre 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s3E839E41 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:30pt; text-align:center } .s58ABC179 { margin-top:30pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s11869A80 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7EE1C8F0 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s6477A72F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA1CDB767 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s281358E1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sFD4D42B6 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s984A15CA { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s9296A950 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } FIRST SECTION Application no. 56111/12 Igor ORBAN against Croatia lodged on 8 August 2012 STATEMENT OF FACTS   1.     The applicant, Mr Igor Orban, is a Croatian national, who was born in 1969 and lives in Osijek. He is represented before the Court by Ms V. Mišin, a lawyer practising in Vinkovci. The circumstances of the case 2.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. 3.     On 21 March 2011 an investigating judge of the Vukovar County Court ( Županijski sud u Vukovaru ) opened an investigation in respect of the applicant, two other persons and two companies in connection with a suspicion of the abuse of power and authority. 4.     On the same day the investigating judge ordered the applicant’s detention on the ground of the risk of tampering with evidence and gravity of charges (Article 102 §§ 1(2) and (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure). 5.     Against the above decision the applicant lodged an appeal with a three-judge panel of the Vukovar County Court. His appeal was dismissed as ill-founded on 31 March 2011. 6.     On 21 April 2011 the investigating judge of the Vukovar County Court extended the applicant’s detention on the same grounds (risk of tampering with evidence and gravity of charges). 7.     The applicant lodged an appeal against the above decision and a three-judge panel of the Vukovar County Court dismissed it as ill-founded on 28 April 2011. 8.     On an unspecified date in June 2011 the investigating judge of the Vukovar County Court again extended the applicant’s detention. 9.     On 24 June 2011 the applicant lodged an appeal with a three-judge panel of the Vukovar County Court. On 30 June 2011 his appeal was dismissed as ill-founded. 10.     On 19 September 2011 the Vukovar County State Attorney’s Office ( Županijsko državno odvjetništvo u Vukovaru ) indicted the applicant and four other persons on charges of the abuse of power and authority, forgery and improper maintenance of the business documentation. 11.     A three-judge panel of the Vukovar County Court on 21 September 2011 extended the applicant’s detention on the ground of gravity of charges. 12.     Against the above decision the applicant lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court ( Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske ) and on 12 October 2011 the Supreme Court dismissed it as ill-founded. 13.     On 13 December 2011 the applicant requested the Vukovar County Court do be released from detention but his request was denied. Against that decision the applicant lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court. 14.     On 4 January 2012 the Supreme Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal. 15.     In the period between 19 January and 2 March 2012 two hearings were adjourned. 16.     On 2 March 2012 a three-judge panel of the Vukovar County Court extended the applicant’s detention again on the ground of gravity of charges. 17.     At a hearing on 11 April 2012 the applicant requested to be released but his request was dismissed. Another hearing, scheduled for 27 April 2012 was adjourned. 18.     On 22 May 2012 a three-judge panel of the Vukovar County Court extended the applicant’s detention on the ground of gravity of charges. The relevant part of the decision reads: “... The accused Igor Orban is charged with two offences of the abuse of power and authority under Article 337 § 4 in conjunction with §§ 1 and 3 of the Criminal Code. The accused have been indicted that they had, acting as the responsible persons in company O. d.o.o., and the accused O.K. also as a responsible person in company K. d.o.o., by the abuse of power and authority, in the period between 10 October 2008 and 29 May 2009, obtained pecuniary gain in the amount of 36.606.101,28 Kunas (count 1), and in the period between 25 February 2008 until the end of 2009 in the amount of 6.258.895,02 Kunas (count 2) ... The manner in which the offences, in respect of which the accused are suspected of, were committed as well as the period at issue, suggest particularly high level of organisation. Together with that, the amount of the pecuniary gain (36.606.101,28   Kunas and 6.258.895,02 Kunas) ... significantly surpasses the constituting elements of the offences under Article 337 Article 337 § 4 in conjunction with §§ 1 and 3 of the Criminal Code § 4 of the Criminal Code ... and also represent particularly grave circumstances of the offence which justify detention under Article 102 § 2(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ...“ 19.     Against the above decision of the Vukovar County Court the applicant lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court and on 13 June 2012 the Supreme Court dismissed his appeal reiterating the same reasons of the Vukovar County Court. 20.     On an unspecified date in 2012, following the decision of the Supreme Court, the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ). 21.     On 18 July 2012 the Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal endorsing the arguments of the lower courts. COMPLAINTS The applicant complains, under Article 5 §§ 1(c) and 3 of the Convention, about the length and lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for his continued detention. He also complains, invoking Article 6 §§ 2 and 3(b) of the Convention, that in their reasoning of the decisions on his detention, the domestic courts violated his presumption of innocence and that the fact that he has been detained prevents him to prepare his defence. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES   Were the reasons relied on by the domestic courts for ordering and extending the applicant’s pre-trial detention relevant and sufficient throughout the detention period as required under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention? Furthermore, was the length of the applicant’s pre-trial detention in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?