CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 11 octobre 2011

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 145 October 2011 Hristovi v. Bulgaria - 42697/05 Judgment 11.10.2011 [Section IV] Article 3 Effective investigation Lack of effective investigation into raid of family home by masked police officers: violation   Facts – The applicants, a married couple and their five-year-old daughter, alleged that in February 2004 masked police officers had burst into their flat, kicked and beaten up the father and threatened to kill the occupants. One of the officers had pointed a gun at the mother and daughter. The daughter was subsequently diagnosed as suffering from stress disorders. The mother lodged a criminal complaint against the police officers but the authorities refused to prosecute as they found that the officers were on a special operation to arrest members of a criminal gang and that there was no evidence that they had used unnecessary force or threatened the applicants. The mother’s appeals were dismissed, inter alia , on the grounds that stress disorder could not be regarded as evidence of ill-treatment. The father was later given a six-year prison sentence for aiding and abetting forgery. Law – Article 3 ( procedural aspect ): The applicants’ allegation that masked police officers had intimidated and threatened them at gunpoint was detailed and coherent. The daughter, who was only five years old at the time, had been deeply affected by what she had experienced. The applicants’ complaints of intimidation and death threats shouted at gunpoint by a masked police officer were therefore at least arguable thus placing the authorities under an obligation to effectively investigate this complaint. It was therefore a matter of concern that, as in other cases against Bulgaria involving special units*, the impugned police officers had not been identified and questioned. In the Court’s view, while legitimate security concerns might require confidentiality when special forces officers were involved, domestic law and practice which, as here, apparently did not allow their identification, at least to those conducting the investigation, and their questioning in an appropriate form, had to be seen as incompatible with the duty to investigate arguable claims of ill-treatment. Indeed, the Court had serious reservations about the use of masked and armed officers to conduct an arrest in a family setting where there was no risk of armed resistance. Where the circumstances were such that the authorities were obliged to deploy masked officers to effect an arrest, the officers should be required to visibly display some anonymous form of identification, such as a number or letter. The deficiency that had been noted in this and in other cases against Bulgaria could fairly be described as conferring virtual impunity on a certain category of police officers and an investigation suffering from such a defect could not be seen as effective. The investigation had suffered from other shortcomings too, including the fact that the decision not to prosecute had essentially been based on statements by a police officer and investigator who had not arrived at the scene until after the alleged incident, and the failure to question the applicants or any independent witnesses. At a more general level these grave deficiencies had also to be seen against the silence (apart from a reference to “threats”) of Bulgarian criminal law on the issue of psychological suffering resulting from, for example, an aggressively conducted search, seizure and arrest operation. Unless complainants alleged physical injury at the hands of State agents, the authorities could not be required to open an investigation. Such a lacuna in the criminal law allowed those allegedly responsible for inflicting psychological trauma, in this case allegedly on a young child, to escape accountability. The criminal investigation into the applicants’ alleged psychological ordeal at the hands of the police had, therefore, not been effective. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). As regards the substantive aspect of Article   3, the Court found that the father’s allegations of ill-treatment had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, so there had been no violation on that account. Article 41: EUR 4,000 to each of the parents and EUR 6,500 to the daughter in respect of non-pecuniary damage. (See also: Kučera v. Slovakia , no. 48666/99, 17 July 2007, Information Note no. 99; and Rachwalski and Ferenc v. Poland , no. 47709/99, 28 July 2009) * Krastanov v. Bulgaria , no. 50222/99, 30   September 2004; and Rashid v.   Bulgaria , no.   47905/99, 18   January 2007.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes