CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 mars 2011

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s72EB7DC5 { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s4070A5A6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:24pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid } SECOND SECTION Application no. 50218/08 by László KÁROLY against Hungary lodged on 30 September 2008   STATEMENT OF FACTS THE FACTS The applicant, Mr László Károly, is a Hungarian national who was born in 1950 and lives in Budapest. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 11 September 2000, at about 7 p.m., the applicant became involved in an animated dispute, of unclear background, with four plain-clothed police officers. After certain disputed incidents, three of them handcuffed him, banged his head against the bonnet of his car and then started to kick him. Subsequently he was committed to the Budapest VIII District Police Department, where he alleges his beating continued; Sergeant P. also insulted him verbally. Thereupon he was locked up in a ward for several hours; later on he was taken to Honvéd Hospital for a medical check-up. The Department of Traumatology established that he had the following injuries: bruises on the back of the head and on both sides of the chest; multiple suffusions on the back; contusions of the renal region on both sides; contusion around the spleen. The next day the applicant filed a criminal complaint against the police officers involved. On 30 June 2003 the Budapest Investigation Office discontinued the investigation. Relying on the opinion of forensic expert Dr   M., the Office was satisfied that the lesions sustained by the applicant did not prove that he had been ill-treated. Simultaneously, criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant on charges of drunken driving and violence against an official. However, on 28 April 2005 he was acquitted. In the ill-treatment case, the applicant filed a motion for private prosecution. On 12 October 2006 the Székesfehérvár District Court acquitted the police officers. The court dismissed the opinions of three private medical experts supporting the applicant’s version of the events, and accepted the version of the accused police officers, according to which the car driven by the applicant on the night of the events had created a traffic obstacle, he had been drunk, refused to abide by the instructions of the police officers and insulted them, and the injuries he had sustained had been caused by lawful coercion. On 24 April 2008 the Győr Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal (Bf.18/2007/17.) COMPLAINT The applicant complains about ill-treatment by the police. He relies on Articles 3, 5, 6 and 13 of the Convention. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?