CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 décembre 2013

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s72EB7DC5 { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left }     Communicated on 16 December 2013   FIRST SECTION Application no. 55102/13 V.R. against Croatia lodged on 25 July 2013 STATEMENT OF FACTS   The applicant, V.R., is a Croatian national, who was born in 1992. The President granted the applicant’s request for his identity not to be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 3 of the Rules of Court). He is represented before the Court by Ms L. Horvat, a lawyer practising in Zagreb. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 8 May 2013 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of sexual abuse and rape of a child. On 10 May 2013 an investigating judge of the Z. County Court ordered his detention under Article 123 § 1(2) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (risk of collusion and risk of reoffending). On 17 May 2013 the applicant appealed and on 21 May 2013 a three-judge panel of the Z. County Court dismissed his appeal as without merit. On 6 June 2013 the investigating judge extended the applicant’s pre-trial detention under Article 123 § 1(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (risk of reoffending). The applicant appealed and on 14 June 2013 a three-judge panel of the Z. County Court dismissed his appeal as without merit. On 5 July 2013 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ) challenging the decisions ordering and extending his pre-trial detention. On the same date the applicant was indicted in the Z. Municipal Court on charges of sexual abuse and rape of a child. On 8 July 2013 a three-judge panel of the Z. Municipal Court extended the applicant’s pre-trial detention under Article 123 § 1(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (risk of reoffending). On 10 July 2013 the Constitutional Court declared the applicant’s constitutional complaint inadmissible on the grounds that a new decision on his detention had been adopted in the meantime on 8 July 2013. On 19 July 2013, upon the applicant’s appeal, a three-judge panel of the Z. County Court quashed the decision extending the applicant’s pre-trial detention on 8 July 2013 and remitted the case to the Z. Municipal Court for re-examination.   On 25 July 2013 the Z. Municipal Court released the applicant from detention, but imposed a number of conditions on his release. COMPLAINT The applicant complains, under Articles 5 § 4 and 13 of the Convention, that he was not able to obtain effective judicial review of the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention by the Constitutional Court. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the procedure by which the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention before the Constitutional Court in conformity with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention?   The Government are requested to submit two copies of the relevant documents concerning the decisions on the applicant’s detention.