NIKOLIC against Serbia
On May 13, 2025, the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter: the Court) rendered, and on June 3 of the same year, published its judgment in the case Nikolić against Serbia, number 21155/22.
It's a verdictbroughtthree-member Board.
The case relates to the alleged ill-treatment of the applicant by the police and the effectiveness of the investigation in this regard. The court assessed that the evidence submitted by the applicant did not indicate that his health problems were caused by the police, that is, that abuse by the police occurred at all, and rejected his complaints regarding the material aspect of Article 3 of the Convention as clearly unfounded. However, the Court found a violation of the procedural aspect of Article 3 of the Convention, because the investigation into the applicant's complaints was not effective, it was not even independent at the beginning, and because the applicant did not participate in it to a sufficient extent. |
THE CIRCUMSTANCES CASES
On February 7, 2013, the applicant, as a minor, filed a criminal complaint with the Basic Public Prosecutor's Office in Novi Sad (hereafter OJT in Novi Sad) against several police officers of the Bački Petrovac Police Station (hereinafter: Backi Petrovac Police Station) for the crimes of extortion of testimony, abuse and torture, unlawful deprivation of liberty, and racial and other discrimination. He claimed that on November 16, 2012, while he was being interrogated at the Backa Petrovac police station about alleged thefts, police officer Mr. V. kicked him in the stomach, while policemen B.J. and B.M. hit his head, causing him to lose consciousness and fall to the ground, and that he was then taken to a children's hospital where he was operated on for a pinched hernia.
On October 30, 2015, the OJT in Novi Sad dismissed the applicant's criminal complaint, as it was determined that there were no grounds for suspicion that a criminal offense was committed, which is being prosecuted ex officio.
On December 1, 2015, the Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Novi Sad (hereinafter: the Prosecutor's Office in Novi Sad) accepted the applicant's complaint and pointed to the shortcomings in the actions of the Public Prosecutor's Office in Novi Sad, which consisted in the fact that a medical examination of the applicant's health condition was not carried out after the events of November 16, 2012, as well as the fact that the investigation into the illegal behavior of the police was delegated to the Bački Petrovac Police Station, whose officers were the subject of the investigation, instead of being entrusted with it. Internal Control Sector of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The OJT in Novi Sad was ordered to question witnesses and suspects, as well as to order a medical examination of the injuries suffered by the applicant.
On July 22, 2016, the OJT in Novi Sad took statements from the mentioned policemen who denied that they abused the applicant in any way. Also, at the end of 2016, a statement was taken from the applicant, while only two years later (October 16, 2018) statements were taken from other witnesses. The finding and opinion of the medical expert was submitted only in February 2019, and according to it, there was no evidence of visible injuries on the applicant's body at the time of the disputed event. He was admitted to the hospital for a pre-existing medical condition and an expert concluded that the pinched hernia was a medical condition that was not caused by the alleged injury.
On June 19, 2019, the OJT in Novi Sad again rejected the applicant's criminal complaint, relying on the above-mentioned medical report, concluding that the applicant's medical records did not record any injuries that the applicant could have suffered due to alleged abuse by the police.
On October 24, 2019, the VJT in Novi Sad rejected the applicant's complaint as unfounded.
On September 10, 2018, the applicant submitted a constitutional complaint to the Constitutional Court against the actions of the OJT in Novi Sad in the case of Kt. 2307/13 and the actions of police officers of the Ministry of Internal Affairs - Novi Sad Police Department - Police Station Bački Petrovac and Police Station Bač from November 16, 2012.
By decision Už-10205/2018 of October 4, 2021, the Constitutional Court rejected as unfounded the constitutional appeal of the applicant in the part related to the violation of Article 25 of the Constitution, while in the other part it rejected the constitutional appeal. In the explanation, the Constitutional Court stated that possible shortcomings of the investigation were eliminated by the actions of the OJT in Novi Sad in its continuation, after the mandatory instructions of the VJT in Novi Sad Ktpo. 283/15 of December 1, 2015. As for the material aspect of this article of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court established that the existence of the applicant's injuries was not established by forensic medical expertise, and that he did not submit evidence with the help of which he could claim the opposite.
COMPLAINTS OF THE APPLICANT AND THE PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COURT
The applicant submitted the petition to the Court on April 1, 2022.
In the petition, he complained about the violation of the prohibition of torture from Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter: the Convention) by the alleged abuse by the police, as well as about the effectiveness of the investigation regarding his complaints in this regard.
THE DECISION THE COURT
The court rejected the applicant's complaints about the violation of the material aspect of Article 3 of the Convention as clearly unfounded. Namely, the Court, applying the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard, assessed that the applicant did not prove that he was subjected to abuse by the police, since the medical documentation on the applicant's hospital treatment indicates that the applicant had no visible injuries and that the pinched hernia for which he was treated was a medical condition that was not caused by an injury.
However, the Court assessed that there had been a violation procedural aspect of Article 3 of the Convention. This is due to the fact that the investigation into his allegations that he was subjected to abuse by the police lasted too long, with significant delays, because the investigation was not independent at the beginning (and this was also noted by the VJT in Novi Sad) and because the applicant was questioned more than three years after the event itself (whereas he did not have procedural status in the investigation, which deprived him of the opportunity to participate in investigative actions to the extent necessary for the protection of his legitimate interests).
FAIRLY SATISFACTION (Article 41 of the Convention)
The court obliged the Republic of Serbia to pay the applicant EUR 1,800.00 for non-material damages, and EUR 2,100 for procedural costs.