CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 13 juin 2002

.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 } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 43 June 2002 Cordova v. Italy (no. 1) (dec.) - 40877/98 Decision 13.6.2002 [Section I] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Access to court Parliamentary immunity – decision of Senate resulting in discontinuation of criminal proceedings against a senator: admissible At the material time, the applicant was employed as a public prosecutor. In that capacity, he conducted an investigation in respect of a person who had had dealings with a former President of Italy who had been appointed "senator for life". The former President subsequently sent the applicant letters written in an ironic tone, as well as presents in the form of children’s games. The applicant regarded the posting of these items as injurious to his honour and reputation and lodged a complaint against the sender. Proceedings were brought against the senator for insulting a member of the legal service and the applicant applied to join the proceedings as a civil party. However, the Senate considered that the offence allegedly committed by the senator amounted to the expression of opinions in the course of his parliamentary duties and was therefore covered by the Constitution. Its president communicated this decision to the magistrate dealing with the case, who took note thereof and ordered the proceedings to be discontinued. The applicant requested the public prosecutor to appeal against the decision to discontinue the proceedings, this being a necessary step if he were to retain the possibility of referring a jurisdictional dispute to the Constitutional Court at a later stage. The prosecutor refused, finding that the reasons given by the Senate for rejecting the complaint were neither illogical nor manifestly arbitrary. Admissible under Article 6 § 1: A decision by a parliamentary chamber stating that the conduct of one of its members fell within the scope of Article 68 § 1 of the Constitution ruled out any possibility of initiating or continuing criminal or civil proceedings aimed at establishing the liability of the member in question and obtaining compensation for any damage sustained.   An appeal by the applicant under Article 576 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or a civil action for damages would have come to nothing because of the decision by the Senate, which had declared that parliamentary immunity applied in this case.   Both remedies therefore lacked any chance of success.   With regard to the possibility of raising jurisdictional disputes, the Italian legal system did not grant individuals direct access to the Constitutional Court to ask it to verify the constitutionality of a law or hear allegations that a state body had exceeded its powers.   Only a court hearing a case on the merits or another state body could apply to the Constitutional Court, at a plaintiff’s request or of its own motion.   Accordingly, this step could not be regarded as a remedy whose exhaustion would be required under Article 35 § 1.   © 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