CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 10 septembre 2024

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } Legal summary October 2024 Chokov v. Bulgaria (dec.) - 73896/16 Decision 10.9.2024 [Section III] Article 35 Article 35-1 Exhaustion of domestic remedies Effective domestic remedy Remedy held to be effective as regards presumption of innocence in context of statements to media by the Secretary General of Ministry of Internal Affairs concerning criminal proceedings against the applicant: inadmissible Facts – In May 2016, one day after the applicant had been arrested and charged, the Secretary General of the Ministry of Internal Affairs took part in a press conference concerning the ongoing criminal proceedings. In November 2016 the applicant lodged an application directly with the Court, complaining under Article   6 §   2, in particular, that the Secretary General’s statements had breached his right to be presumed innocent. The criminal proceedings against the applicant ended in 2022. Law – Article   35 §   1: The Government raised an objection of failure to exhaust domestic remedies, arguing that the applicant could have, in particular, brought an action for damages under section   49 of the Obligations and Contracts Act. The Court pointed out that it had already examined and rejected this objection in its Lolov and Others v.   Bulgaria judgment. In contrast to the situation in Lolov and Others , the Government’s objection in the present case was based on substantiating material, in that the respondent State had produced domestic rulings delivered in two separate cases. In one of those cases, which had been examined between 2010 and 2012, the courts had found in the claimant’s favour and had awarded him financial compensation for the damage caused by statements by the Regional Director of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which had called into question his presumption of innocence. The final decision in that case had been delivered four years before the 2016 press conference in issue. The applicant in the present case could have brought an action for damages without waiting for the conclusion of the criminal proceedings against him. In short, a remedy   – namely an action for damages under section   49 of the Obligations and Contracts Act   – had been available to the applicant at domestic level when he lodged his application with the Court. It would have provided him with an opportunity to obtain acknowledgement that his right to be presumed innocent had been breached through the statements made by the Secretary General of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and appropriate redress in the form of financial compensation. There was no reason not to have pursued that remedy. Conclusion : inadmissible (failure to exhaust domestic remedies). (See also Vučković and Others v.   Serbia (preliminary objection) [GC], 17153/11 et al., 25   March 2014, Legal Summary ; Lolov and Others v.   Bulgaria , 6123/11 , 21   February 2019; Mamaladze v.   Georgia , 9487/19, 3   November 2022, Legal Summary )   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. To access legal summaries in English or French click here . For non-official translations into other languages click here .