CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 22 septembre 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s2785BC08 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } Communicated on 22 September 2020 Published on 5 October 2020   FIRST SECTION Application no. 77796/17 Vladimir TALESKI against North Macedonia and 5 other applications (see list appended) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants are former high-ranking Government officials or municipality Mayors suspected of having committed various criminal offences, such as an abuse of office, criminal conspiracy, forgery, elections-related offences or ill-treatment. Pending the investigation regarding those alleged crimes, the President of the State adopted (relying on section 11 of the 1993 Pardon Act ( Закон за помилување )) individual decisions on pardon (“pardon decisions”, помилување ) and rulings exempting each applicant separately from prosecution ( ослободува од гонење ) regarding those crimes. Based on a statutory provision adopted subsequently, the President of the State revoked ( поништува ) the pardon decisions and the related rulings (“revocation decisions”). The domestic courts confirmed the bills of indictment ( обвинителен акт ) dismissing complaints by (almost all) the applicants that the pardon decisions by the President of the State had been unconditional and that, accordingly, proceedings against them should be discontinued. The criminal proceedings against the applicants (the applicants Taleski and Temelko were remanded in custody after the President’s pardon decisions) regarding the same offences are still pending. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES A. Questions regarding all applicants:   1.     Were the pardon decisions by the President of the State dated 12   April 2016 irrevocable? Were the revocation decisions by the President of the State dated 27 May 2016 and 7 June 2016 based on a subsequent statutory provision (section 11-a of the 2016 Pardon Act, Official Gazette no.   99/2016) compatible with the principles of rule of law and legal certainty?   2.     Was 2016 Pardon Act of an individualised nature that targeted specific persons? In addition and given the short-term nature of the President’s entitlement to revoke a pardon issued without regular proceedings, was 2016 Pardon Act compatible with the principles of rule of law and legal certainty?   3.     In the light of the questions under 1) and 2) above, is the applicants’ prosecution regarding the alleged crimes to which the pardon and revocation decisions by the President of the State relate permissible? If not,   B.     Question regarding applications nos. 77796/17; 81848/17; 81862/17; 11583/18 and 30884/18   Has there been a violation of Article 6 of the Convention with respect to the pending criminal proceedings against the applicants in relation to the alleged crimes to which the pardon and revocation decisions by the President of the State relate?   C.     Question regarding applications nos. 77796/17 and 80003/17   Was the applicants’ detention ordered in the context of the criminal proceedings subject to the pardon and revocation decisions by the President of the State “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” within the meaning of Article 5 of the Convention (see Lexa v. Slovakia , no. 54334/00, § 142, 23 September 2008)? APPENDIX   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Nationality Represented by 1. 77796/17 Taleski v. North Macedonia 03/11/2017 Vladimir TALESKI 1959 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia                                     Vlatko ILIEVSKI 2. 80003/17 Temelko v. North Macedonia 21/11/2017 Edmond TEMELKO 1972 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia and Albanian 3. 81848/17 Gruevski and Others v. North Macedonia 30/11/2017 Nikola GRUEVSKI 1970 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia   Mile JANAKIESKI 1978 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia   Toni TRAJKOVSKI 1973 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia 4. 81862/17 Jakimovski and Jankuloska v. North Macedonia 30/11/2017 Toni JAKIMOVSKI 1963 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia   Gordana JANKULOSKA 1975 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia 5. 11583/18 Jankuloska v. North Macedonia 20/02/2018 Gordana JANKULOSKA 1975 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia   Mile JANAKIESKI 1978 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia 6. 30884/18 Mijalkov v. North Macedonia 27/06/2018 Sasho MIJALKOV 1965 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia