MINISTERS’ DEPUTIES

Notes on the Agenda

CM/Notes/1514/H46-19

5 December 2024

1514th meeting, 3-5 December 2024 (DH) Human rights   H46-19 Gubacsi group v. Hungary (Application No. 44686/07) Supervision of the execution of the European Court’s judgments Reference documents DH-DD(2023)1296, DH-DD(2024)1114, CM/Del/Dec(2022)1451/H46-16

 

Application	Case	Judgment of	Final on	Indicator for the classification
44686/07	GUBACSI	28/06/2011	28/09/2011	Complex problem
43441/15	NAGY	26/05/2020	26/05/2020
40885/16	PÓSA	07/07/2020	07/10/2020
75260/17	CSÚCS	15/04/2021	15/04/2021
7329/16	MATA	07/07/2022	07/07/2022
48444/18	R.B.	19/01/2023	19/01/2023
40246/19	LÓZAY	15/02/2024	15/02/2024

Case description

This group of cases concerns ill-treatment (between 2000 and 2017) by law enforcement officers during the applicants’ arrest, transfer and detention, and lack of effective investigations, including failure to investigate possible racist motives for ill-treatment, and violations of the right to life in the same context (substantive and/or procedural violations of Articles 2, 3, and 14 in conjunction with Article 3). The issue under Article 14 is examined in the context of the Balázs group (No. 15529/12).

Major shortcomings identified by the Court in finding violations of the procedural limb of Article 2 or 3 included: failure to hear the applicant, the suspected police officers and/or all other witnesses; lack of face-to-face confrontation; lack of genuine efforts by the investigating authorities and/or the competent courts to establish the chronology of the events and to resolve contradictions between different testimonies or between testimonies and medical reports; lapse of time in obtaining testimonies; absence of the police medical report sheet; destruction of the full, uncut version of the arrest video-recording after the thirty-day statutory storage period; and, lack of judicial review of the decision to discontinue investigations.

Status of execution

Since the examination of this group by the Committee of Ministers in December 2022, the authorities submitted updated action plans on 27 October 2023 (DH-DD(2023)1296) and on 3 October 2024
(DH-DD(2024)1114).

Individual measures 

The just satisfaction awarded by the Court was duly paid in all cases. The authorities submitted that in the six pending repetitive cases (Nagy, Pósa, Csúcs, Mata, R. B., Lózay) the statute of limitations has expired, so that there was no possibility to continue the criminal proceedings or initiate disciplinary proceedings.

General measures

1. Institutional culture of “zero tolerance” towards ill-treatment

In December 2022, the Committee called on the authorities to communicate, at the highest possible level, a “zero tolerance” message towards ill-treatment and to identify and adopt the measures required to promote an institutional “zero tolerance” culture by focusing on prevention, notably through systematic training, awareness raising activities and psychological support to low-ranking officers. No information was received in this respect.

In their 2023 action plan, the authorities submitted that the Minister of Interior had decided to refrain from establishing the unfitness for service of seven professional staff members of the police, despite the fact that they had been found unfit for service in court due to their convictions for the offence of ill-treatment.

2. Effective safeguards against ill-treatment

The authorities and civil society reported progress related to the increase in videorecording of police work, as requested by the Committee at its last examination. Data from May 2024 demonstrates the following: out of 8,270 police vehicles, 681 were equipped with image recording equipment, and in 620 police vehicles these were in use (7.5%, compared to 1.4% in 2022). The police have acquired 344 body cameras of which 308 were in service (compared to only 70 in 2022). 68% of custody suites in the country (which are for short detention of maximum 12 hours) were equipped with a camera (compared to 38% in 2020). All 20 holding facilities of the police (for longer detentions) were equipped with a camera capable of recording image and sound. Lastly, out of the 3,479 interrogation rooms available to the police, 372 now allow for image and sound recording of interrogations (10.7%).[1]

The scope of instances where video recording of police work is mandatory has not however been extended, and there has been no change in the law regarding the statutory period of storing recordings either. Situations in which videorecording of police work is mandatory remain very limited;[2] otherwise it remains at the discretion of the police officer to decide on the necessity of such recording.

The provided data indicates that the number of recorded interrogations has significantly increased. During only the first seven months of 2024, 6,646 witness hearings, 2,547 defendant interviews and 345 confrontations were recorded by the police (compared to for the entire year of 2022: 3,641 witness hearings, 2,493 defendant interviews and 383 confrontations).[3] No information is available on the percentage of mandatory compared to discretionary recordings.

No new information was provided on measures to improve the quality of medical examinations of detained persons in police holding facilities complaining of ill-treatment. Despite the Committee’s calls in this respect,[4] the authorities do not consider it necessary to establish an independent medical examination body mandated to examine alleged victims of ill-treatment, and no measures were taken to ensure full confidentiality of such medical examinations in practice. They argue that the doctors carrying out medical examinations are independent and that police presence during examinations is necessary given that detainees’ aggressive behaviour may frustrate the process.

3. Adequate and systematic training

As for the police, the authorities provided information on the curricula of several different educational programmes provided to police officers. The post-secondary vocational training of police officers contains modules on ethical principles, rules of conduct and prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in police work. The specialised training for public security police patrol officers, border police and passport control officers contains elements on coping with stressful situations, developing high-quality police culture and professional conduct. The National Police Headquarters however do not provide for any centralised police trainings focusing specifically on ill-treatment. Regional bodies conduct their own trainings independently, but no information is available on specialised police ill-treatment trainings on that level.

As for the prosecution, prosecutors are encouraged to participate in HELP training programmes. In November 2023, the Department for Terrorism, Money Laundering and Military Cases of the Prosecutor General held a mandatory training for investigating prosecutors on the topic of “Treatment of persons subject to investigation”. The training covered the topic of investigations into police ill-treatment including Council of Europe standards and the case-law of the European Court.

4. Effective investigations into police ill-treatment

In 2023, the Office of the Prosecutor General carried out a targeted internal inspection of investigations into ill-treatment and coercive interrogation cases. The inspection, which covered the period between 1 January 2022 and 30 June 2023, revealed that the majority of these investigations had been closed for lack of evidence and that the prosecution committed errors in 65% of the cases. The Prosecutor General’s Office drew up recommendations, including the need to improve planning of investigations, ensuring the quality of interrogations and fact-findings, and securing victims’ rights. It concluded that in all cases where the termination of the investigation had not been well-founded, the necessary measures should be taken.

As regards indictment and conviction rates, the authorities submitted statistical data for 2022 and 2023 which show that they remain very low (see DH-DD(2024)1114, points 98 and 102 for details).[5] The reportedly lenient sentencing practice (suspended prison sentences and criminal fines) in ill-treatment cases also appears to persist.^[6]

No information was submitted in response to the Committee’s call to consider introducing an ex officio practice of re-examining ill-treatment investigations at an earlier stage of the Convention proceedings and to review the domestic legislation to extend or lift the relatively short five-year prescription period for crimes of ill-treatment by law enforcement officers (cf. CM/Del/Dec(2022)1451/H46-16, § 14).

Rule 9.2 communications

On 4 and 21 October 2024 the Hungarian Helsinki Committee (HHC) submitted two communications under Rule 9.2 (DH-DD(2024)1177 and DH-DD(2024)1245). The HHC criticised the lack of determination from the authorities on “zero-tolerance” towards police ill-treatment, as well as the lack of a comprehensive plan for prevention. They argued that legal and practical deficiencies should be addressed in relation to the videorecording of police work, and that specialised trainings on ill-treatment prevention should be provided. They noted the persisting lack of measures to ensure independent and adequate medical examinations of alleged victims of ill-treatment, as well as the low rates of indictments and judicial leniency towards law enforcement officers. They expressed concern as to the practice of reinstating convicted law enforcement officers to service and about the lack of systematic reopening of investigations following the finding of a violation by the European Court.

Analysis by the Secretariat

Individual measures

Ill-treatment investigations must be carried out, from the outset, by independent bodies.[7] Information from the authorities provided to the Committee regarding the requisite re-examination of ill-treatment cases should indicate that the case was re-examined by a competent independent body and, if the case has become time-barred, the fact that such conclusion was reached by that body.

Given the lack of such confirmation from the Hungarian authorities in the cases at hand,[8] the Committee might wish to invite the authorities to urgently submit information on the re-examination by the competent independent authorities of the cases Nagy, Pósa, Csúcs, Mata, R.B., and Lózay, including their conclusions on the investigatory steps that can still be taken, on those that can no longer be taken for practical or legal reasons (including prescription of the relevant offences) and on the possibility of (re)opening disciplinary proceedings. 

General measures

 

At the outset the Committee might wish to recall with concern that ill-treatment by law-enforcement officers has been a long-standing and complex problem in Hungary which, as underlined by the Hungarian Helsinki Committee in their submissions, continues to give rise to complaints at domestic level and new applications before the Court.[9]

1. Institutional culture of “zero tolerance” towards ill-treatment

The Committee might therefore wish to note with regret that the “zero tolerance” message towards ill-treatment in law enforcement, at the highest possible level, has not yet been communicated as requested previously and to strongly urge the authorities to take the necessary steps without further delay.

As regards the promotion of an institutional “zero tolerance” culture towards ill-treatment by focusing on prevention notably through systematic training, awareness raising and psychological support to low-ranking officers, the Committee might wish to call on the authorities to provide comprehensive information on the implementation of relevant measures already reported by the authorities in 2018,[10] as well as on any other measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Minister of Interior’s decisions to reinstate staff members of the police who had been found unfit for service due to their convictions for ill-treatment not only contradict the principles set out in the Court’s case law,^[11] but also convey a message of factual impunity and raise serious concerns about the service of the affected law enforcement officers. The Committee might wish to note this information with concern and call on the authorities to ensure that the practice of reinstating law enforcement officers following a criminal conviction is compliant with the Court’s case-law and excluded in cases of conviction for ill-treatment.

2. Effective safeguards against ill-treatment

The Committee might wish to welcome, as also recognised by the Hungarian Helsinki Committee in their submissions, the considerable increase in the number of recording devices available for the police in interrogation rooms, detention facilities, police vehicles and as body cameras, as well as the increasing number of recorded interrogations. The Committee might wish to encourage the authorities to intensify their efforts and further increase the number of recording devices used by the police and the number of recorded interrogations, as well as to provide further statistical data on the number of recorded police interrogations, also indicating the percentage of mandatory and discretionary recordings. The Committee might further wish to reiterate its call on the authorities, in line with the recommendations made by the CPT, to adopt legislative measures extending the scope of instances where video recording of police work is mandatory,[12] and increasing the thirty-day statutory period of storage of relevant video-recordings.

The Committee’s calls to adopt measures ensuring detainees’ access to adequate medical care remain unanswered, and this despite the concerns also expressed by CPT.[13] No measures seem to have been taken to strengthen the NPM function of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights either. Therefore, the Committee might wish to reiterate its calls in its decision of December 2022 in this respect (see CM/Del/Dec(2022)1451/H46-16, § 10).

3. Adequate and systematic training

The Committee might wish to note with interest the information received on educational programmes provided to police officers, as well as the focused training provided to investigating prosecutors in 2023. Nevertheless, the organisation of specific trainings focusing on prevention of police ill-treatment covering Council of Europe standards and the Court’s case-law would be highly beneficial, also given the persistence of the problem and the importance of prevention. The Committee might wish to encourage the authorities to take the necessary steps to launch centralised trainings on police ill-treatment and ensure that such trainings reach as many officers as possible. Underlining the importance of efficient cooperation in the field of policing, the Committee might further wish to invite the authorities to consider engaging in relevant cooperation activities and projects within the Council of Europe. The Hungarian authorities may wish to also draw inspiration from ongoing cooperation between the Council of Europe and other member states in the field of the police and deprivation of liberty.[14]

4. Effective investigations into police ill-treatment

The Committee might wish to note with interest the Prosecutor General’s targeted internal inspection into
ill-treatment investigations and the resulting recommendations to remedy the shortcomings revealed by that inspection. If implemented adequately, these recommendations might have a considerable positive impact on the effectiveness of ill-treatment investigations. However, it appears that an important shortcoming repeatedly criticised by the Court remains unaddressed, notably the prosecution’s practice of not questioning the implicated police officers either as witnesses, because of the risk of self-incrimination, or as suspects, in the absence of a well-founded suspicion of a crime.[15] The Court criticised this approach,[16] which barred the applicants from access to the suspected police officers and thus deprived them of any opportunity to challenge the alleged perpetrators’ version of the events.

The Committee might wish to note with concern the low number of indictments and convictions following criminal complaints of ill-treatment or coercive interrogation. The deficiencies in the prosecution’s practice, also revealed by the Prosecutor General’s targeted internal inspection, appear to be an important factor in this respect. The Committee might wish to call for additional measures to enhance the effectiveness of investigations, notably by addressing the problems identified by the Court (see above in the case description) and by the Prosecutor General’s Office in its internal inspection, including measures to ensure that implicated police officers are questioned during investigations. Updated statistical information about all criminal investigations into ill-treatment by law enforcement officers and their outcome are required to assess the impact of the measures underway and adopted.

Lastly, to avoid that the prosecution is prevented from re-opening future similar cases due to prescription, the Committee might wish to reiterate its call on the authorities to introduce a practice enabling the prosecution to proceed ex officio with such reopening, either when applications are communicated by the Court, or at the latest immediately after the delivery of a judgment finding a violation. The Committee might also wish to reiterate its call on the authorities to consider reviewing the domestic law to extend or lift the relatively short (five-year) prescription period for crimes of ill-treatment in line with other member states’ practices.^[17]

Conclusion

At its 1451^st meeting in December 2022, the Committee decided to consider the adoption of an interim resolution in the event that no tangible progress has been achieved by the next examination of this group.

The increased number of recording devices available for the police, as well as the increasing number of recorded interrogations are noteworthy developments in terms of safeguards against ill-treatment. The prosecution’s focused training in 2023 as well as the Prosecutor General’s Office’s targeted internal inspection into ill-treatment investigations and the resultant recommendations are also positive steps to strengthen the effectiveness of investigations. In light of that progress, it does not appear necessary to consider the adoption of an interim resolution at this stage. That being said, urgent progress is required as regards (i) the promotion of an institutional culture of “zero tolerance” towards ill-treatment, (ii) the effectiveness and Convention-compliance of prosecutorial investigations in cases of alleged ill-treatment, including the issue of low indictment rates, and (iii) the timely reopening of ill-treatment investigations at an earlier stage of the Convention proceedings.

Against this background, the Committee might wish to invite the authorities to submit an updated action plan by the end of September 2025 and decide to resume examination of this group at its DH meeting in March 2026. In the absence of tangible progress by March 2026 in the above listed issues (i)-(iii), the Committee might wish to consider taking new action to ensure that the respondent State abides by its obligations deriving from the Court’s judgments.

Financing assured: YES