CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 juillet 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sE485344B { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:28.6pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.6pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3A692EA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sA2548810 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s718D1C37 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s761D06F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Communicated on 6 July 2020 Published on 27 July 2020   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 12152/16 Imre BLONSKI against Hungary and 17 other applications (see list appended) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The circumstances of the cases The complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concern the applicants’ conviction to life imprisonment and their eligibility for release on parole only after having served a minimum period of their sentence, set in the respective final court judgments. Mr Blonski was convicted of aggravated murder on 29 April 2010 by the Budapest Regional Court. He was sentenced to life-imprisonment with a minimum term of thirty-five years. The applicant’s request for a review with the Kúria was dismissed on 28 September 2015. R.H. was convicted of murder and abuse of firearms by the Borsod ‑   Abaúj-Zemplén Country Regional Court on 1 December 2009. The trial court set the minimum period before eligibility for release at thirty-five years. The sentence was upheld by the Debrecen Court of Appeal on 16   September 2010. A.A. was convicted of incitement to murder a public official, armed robbery, abuse of firearms, fraud, theft and deprivation of liberty. He was sentenced by the Győr-Moson-Sopron County Regional Court to life imprisonment, eligible for parole after having served a minimum period of thirty years. The judgment was upheld on appeal by the Győr Court of Appeal on 27 October 2007. Mr Kolompár was convicted of aggravated murder by the Pest County Regional Court on 2 February 2006 and sentenced to life imprisonment eligible for parole after having served a minimum period of thirty years. Mr Coman was found guilty of aggravated murder, robbery, deprivation of liberty, causing bodily harm by the Budapest High Court on 30   October   2014. The court sentenced him to life imprisonment and set the minimum term to be served before eligibility for parole at forty years. The judgment was upheld on appeal by the Budapest Court of Appeal on 22   September 2015. Mr Benjámin was convicted of attempted murder, abuse of explosives, abuse of firearms, prison break and falsifying public documents by the Pest County Regional Court on 10 February 2000. He was sentenced to life imprisonment, eligible for parole after having served a minimum period of thirty years. The judgment was upheld by the Supreme Court on 15   January   2001. The applicant’s request for retrial was dismissed by the Budapest Court of Appeal on 3 September 2018. His complaint to the Constitutional Court was dismissed without an examination on the merits on 9 May 2018. Mr K.   Szabó was sentenced by the Debrecen High Court to a life sentence not eligible for parole for murder, robbery, causing bodily harm and other related offences on 14 February 2013. The sentence was overturned on appeal by the Debrecen Court of Appeal on 24 June 2013 and the applicant was sentenced to life imprisonment eligible for parole after having served a minimum period of thirty-five years. Mr Rendek was found guilty of aggravated murder and rape and sentenced to life imprisonment by the Komárom-Esztergom County Regional Court. The trial court set the minimum term to be served before eligibility for release on parole at thirty-five years. The judgment was upheld on appeal by the Győr Court of Appeal on 5 January 2006. Mr Német was found guilty of murder by the Budapest Surrounding High Court on 18 June 2013. As a multiple recidivist, he was sentenced to life imprisonment with the earliest date of release on parole set in thirty ‑ seven years. The judgment was upheld on appeal by the Budapest Court of Appeal on 22 April 2015. The applicant’s request for review was dismissed by the Kúria on 28 January 2016. Mr Ujfalusi was convicted of murder and breach of domicile by the Szolnok High Court on 24 March 2015. He was sentenced to life imprisonment eligible for release on parole after a minimum period of thirty-two years. The judgment was upheld by the Szeged Court of Appeal, acting as a second-instance court, on 2 November 2016. Mr Tóth was sentenced to life imprisonment eligible for parole after having served a minimum period of thirty years for aggravated murder on 10   April 2003 by the Heves County Regional Court. The judgment was upheld on appeal by the Budapest Court of Appeal on 20 April 2004. Mr Kajor was convicted of murder on 10 April 2017 by the Budapest Surroundings High Court. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with the earliest date of parole set in thirty years. The judgment was upheld on appeal on 9 November 2017 by the Budapest Court of Appeal. Mr O.   Szabó was sentenced to life imprisonment with no possibility of parole for murder committed with special cruelty by the Székesfehérvár High Court on 26 November 2013. On 2 May 2018 the Budapest Court of Appeal, acting as a second-instance court, upheld the applicant’s conviction but amended his sentence to life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after having served a minimum of thirty years. Mr Tintér was found guilty of attempted murder, abuse of firearms and breach of domicile on 18 February 2015 by the Szolnok High Court. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and the trial court set the minimum period before eligibility for release on parole at thirty years. The Szeged Court of Appeal, acting as a second instance court, found the applicant guilty of murder and upheld the remainder of the first-instance judgment on 22   September 2016. Mr Páva was convicted of multiple counts of murder committed with special cruelty. On 31 May 2001 the Békés Couty Regional Court sentenced him to life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after forty years. The judgment was upheld on appeal by the Szeged Court of Appeal on 15   July   2003. Mr P.A. was convicted of instigating to murder his mother. On 28   March 2002 the Budapest Regional Court sentenced him to life imprisonment with the earliest date of release on parole set in thirty-five years. The judgment was upheld on appeal by the Supreme Court on 26   March 2003. Mr Szilágyi was convicted of murder on 18 December 2013 by the Debrecen High Court. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of thirty years to be served before eligibility for release on parole. The applicant’s conviction was upheld by the Debrecen Court of Appeal on 10 February 2014. As regards the applicant’s sentence, the Court of Appeal held that the provisions of the new Criminal Code were more favourable to the applicant and were therefore applicable to his case. It nonetheless set the minimum period before eligibility for release on parole at thirty years. Mr Burka was convicted of murder committed with special cruelty and attempted sexual violence and sentenced to life imprisonment eligible for parole after thirty years on 7 October 2013 by the Debrecen High Court, sitting as a juvenile court. On 26 February 2016 the Debrecen Court of Appeal, acting as a second-instance court, upheld the applicant’s conviction, but set the earliest date of eligibility for release on parole at thirty-five years. Relevant domestic law Act no. IV of 1978 on the (old) Criminal Code, as in force until 30   June   2013 provided in its relevant parts as follows: Article 47/A “(1) If a sentence of life imprisonment is imposed, the judgment shall establish the earliest date of eligibility for parole, or shall preclude any eligibility for parole. (2) If the court has not precluded eligibility for parole, the earliest date of release on parole shall be after serving a term of twenty years, or at least a term of thirty years, if the life imprisonment was imposed for a criminal act that is punishable without any period of limitation. ...” Act no. C of 2012 on the (new) Criminal Code, as in force from 1   July   2013, provides in its relevant parts as follows: Life Imprisonment Article 41 “(1) Only persons over the age of twenty at the time of commission of the criminal act shall be sentenced to life imprisonment. This provision also applies to the life sentences imposed under Subsection (4) of Section 81 and Subsection (2) of Section 90. (2) Life imprisonment shall be served in a penitentiary.” Release on Parole from Life Imprisonment Article 42 “In the event a sentence of life imprisonment is imposed, the court shall specify the earliest date of eligibility for parole, or shall preclude any eligibility for parole.” Article 43 “(1) If the court has not precluded eligibility for parole with a sentence of life imprisonment, the earliest date of release on parole shall be after serving twenty-five years, or at least forty years. The earliest time of release on parole shall be determined in years. (2) The duration of parole in the case of life imprisonment shall be not less than fifteen years.” QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Have the applicants been deprived of any real prospect of release and thus potentially subjected to inhuman punishment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, in view of the fact that they will not be eligible for release on parole before having served the minimum term set at between thirty and forty years in the respective court judgments?   APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality 1 12152/16 Blonski v. Hungary Imre BLONSKI 1970 Tiszalök Hungarian 2 16796/16 R.H. v. Hungary R.H. 1981 Sátoraljaújhely Hungarian 3 47754/17 A.A. v. Hungary A.A. 1980 Sátoraljaújhely Hungarian 4 49232/17 Kolompár v. Hungary Tibor KOLOMPÁR 1974 Budapest Hungarian 5 49006/18 Coman v. Hungary Gheorghe Florin COMAN 1977 Kelementelep Romanian 6 59530/18 Benjamin v. Hungary Simon BENJAMIN 1972 Balassagyarmat Hungarian 7 55374/19 Szabó v. Hungary Károly SZABÓ 1979 Szeged Hungarian 8 56162/19 Rendek v. Hungary Imre László RENDEK 1976 Szeged Hungarian 9 57459/19 Német v. Hungary Attila NÉMET 1983 Szeged Hungarian 10 57463/19 Újfalusi v. Hungary István ÚJFALUSI 1989 Szeged Hungarian 11 58544/19 Tóth v. Hungary Attila TÓTH 1980 Szeged Hungarian 12 59440/19 Kajor v. Hungary Attila KAJOR 1981 Balassagyarmat Hungarian 13 6206/20 Szabó v. Hungary Olivér SZABÓ 1975 Szeged Hungarian 14 10615/20 Tintér v. Hungary István TINTÉR 1963 Szeged Hungarian 15 13524/20 Páva v. Hungary Sándor PÁVA 1972 Szeged Hungarian 16 13527/20 P.A. v. Hungary P.A. 1979 Szeged Hungarian 17 13528/20 Szilágyi v. Hungary Norbert SZILÁGYI 1988 Szeged Hungarian 18 14264/20 Burka v. Hungary Antal BURKA 1989 Szeged Hungarian