CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 4 juillet 2007

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s69BE285C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt } .s9A223E1B { width:11.03pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s595A57E4 { width:85.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s3CED24E9 { width:27.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   476 4.7.2007   Press release issued by the Registrar   GRAND CHAMBER HEARING KORBÉLY v. HUNGARY   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Grand Chamber hearing today, Wednesday 4 July 2007 at 9 a.m., in the Human Rights building, Strasbourg, in the case of Korbély v. Hungary (application no. 9174/02). The hearing will be broadcast from 2.30 p.m. on the Court’s Internet site http://www.echr.coe.int .     The applicant   The case concerns an application brought by a Hungarian national, János Korbély who was born in 1929 and lives in Szentendre (Hungary). The applicant is a retired military officer who was serving a sentence at Budapest Prison when the application was introduced.   Summary of the facts   In 1994 the Budapest Military Public Prosecutor’s Office indicted the applicant for his participation in the quelling of a riot in Tata during the 1956 uprising. He was charged with having commanded, as captain, a 15-strong squad in an assignment, on 26 October 1956, to regain control of the building of the Tata Police Department, which had been taken over by armed rioters, and with having shot, and ordered his men to shoot at, civilians. Several people died or were injured in the incident.   On 29 May 1995 the Military Bench of the Budapest Regional Court discontinued the criminal proceedings, holding that the crime with which the applicant was charged – homicide and incitement to homicide, rather than a crime against humanity – was statute-barred. The prosecution appealed.   On 7 May 1998 the Military Bench of the Budapest Regional Court discontinued the criminal proceedings against the applicant, ruling that a conviction could not be grounded on the Geneva Convention on the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. That decision was upheld by the Supreme Court on 5 November 1998.   However, on the prosecution’s motion for review the Supreme Court’s review bench quashed this decision. The case was eventually remitted to the Military Bench of the Budapest Regional Court which held on 18 January 2001 that Mr Korbély was guilty of a crime against humanity, having committed and incited to commit multiple killings. It ruled that the applicant should be prosecuted under the Geneva Convention and sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment and the loss of certain rights for a period of five years. He was given a discharge on account of an amnesty.   On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the crime against humanity which the applicant had committed should be classified as the murder of more than one person and increased the sentence to five years’ imprisonment. Given the increased sentence, the applicant was no longer entitled to a discharge; however, its duration was to be reduced by one eighth because of the relevant amnesty provisions.   Mr Korbély appealed unsuccessfully against his conviction and also applied for a pardon, likewise without success. He began to serve his sentence on 24 March 2003 and on 31 May 2005 he was conditionally released.   Complaints   The applicant submits that he was convicted unlawfully, as the acts of which he stood accused did not constitute a war crime at the time when they had taken place. He further complains of the length of the proceedings against him He relies on Article 6 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time) and 7 (no punishment without law) of the European Convention on Human Rights.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 20 January 2002. On 3 May 2007 the Chamber to which the case had been allocated relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber, under Article 30 [1] of the Convention.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Jean-Paul Costa (French), President , Christos Rozakis (Greek), Nicolas Bratza (British), Peer Lorenzen (Danish), Françoise Tulkens (Belgian), Loukis Loucaides (Cypriot), Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portuguese) Volodymyr Butkevych (Ukrainian), András Baka (Hungarian), Kristaq Traja (Albanian), Vladimiro Zagrebelsky (Italian), Antonella Mularoni (San Marinese), Elisabet Fura-Sandström (Swedish), Renate Jaeger (German), Sverre Erik Jebens (Norwegian), Dragoljub Popović (Serbian), Mark Villiger (Swiss) [2] , judges , Javier Borrego Borrego (Spanish), Karel Jungwiert (Czech), substitute judges , and also Michael O’Boyle , Deputy Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :   Lipót Höltzl , Agent ,   Mónika Weller , Zoltán Tallódi , Co-agents;   Applicant :   Lászlo Sándor Molnár , András Cech , Counsel .     ***   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private [3] .   Press contacts Emma Hellyer (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15) Stéphanie Klein (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Beverley Jacobs (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. [1] Where a case pending before a Chamber raises a serious question affecting the interpretation of the Convention or the protocols thereto, or where the resolution of a question before the Chamber might have a result inconsistent with a judgment previously delivered by the Court, the Chamber may, at any time before it has rendered its judgment, relinquish jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber, unless one of the parties to the case objects. [2] Judge elected in respect of Liechtenstein. [3] This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.