Published on 2 December 2024
 
FOURTH SECTION
Application no. 5183/24
Andrei-Claudiu ANTONESCU
against Romania
lodged on 9 February 2024
communicated on 12 November 2024
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns a criminal investigation in respect of bodily injuries inflicted on the applicant by a private individual.
The applicant was assaulted on 17 January 2016 by an unknown man, as a result of which he sustained a fracture on his leg and multiple bruises. A forensic expert examination determined that his recovery would require around 80 days of medical care. Soon after the incident, the police informed him verbally that they had identified the assailant, but then the investigation stalled. The applicant contacted the police and prosecutor repeatedly, to no avail. On 13 February 2019 the Bucharest District Court concluded that the investigation was lengthy and ordered, also on 15 November 2019, that the prosecutor conclude the investigation within a time-limit set. On 23 July 2020 the prosecutor lodged an indictment, which a pre-trial judge returned with an order that certain irregularities in the investigation be corrected. After the prosecutor had re-submitted the case to the court, the trial was discontinued on 4 April 2023 because the statute of limitations had expired. On 17 October 2023 the Bucharest Court of Appeal confirmed the discontinuation of the criminal trial. In the same decision, the court ordered the alleged perpetrator to pay monetary compensation to the applicant for the injuries sustained.
The applicant alleges a breach of Article 6 of the Convention complaining that the authorities did not effectively and promptly investigate the assault.
 
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1.  Since the Court is the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case (see Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, § 114, 20 March 2018), and having regard to the procedural protection from inhuman or degrading treatment (see Isayeva v. Ukraine, no. 35523/06, §§ 46-47, 4 December 2018, and Beganović v. Croatia, no. 46423/06, §§ 64-87, 25 June 2009), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 3 of the Convention? In particular,
 
(a)  Did the investigation by the domestic authorities satisfy the requirement of promptness under Article 3 of the Convention? In particular, was the lapse of more than four years between the assault against the applicant on 17 January 2016 and the indictment of 23 July 2020, excessive?
 
(b)  Have the prosecutorial authorities complied with the orders of 13 February and 15 November 2019 of the Bucharest District Court?
 
2.  The parties are invited to comment on the impact of the civil compensation awarded by the domestic court on the applicant’s victim status, as regards the complaint of ineffective investigation.