🇬🇧🇬🇷 Freedom

Liberta

The Right to Compensation for Arbitrary Deprivation of Liberty: International and European Standards

1. Regulatory Framework of the Right to Compensation

1.1. Article 5, paragraph 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

Article 5, paragraph 5 of the ECHR provides that everyone who has been the victim of arrest or detention in contravention of the provisions of Article 5 shall have an enforceable right to compensation. This right is derived from the preceding paragraphs of Article 5, which guarantee the right to liberty and security and prohibit arbitrary deprivation of liberty. The right to compensation is absolute and is not subject to the discretion of state authorities.

1.2. Article 9, paragraph 5 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

Article 9, paragraph 5 of the ICCPR mandates that anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. This right is part of the general guarantee against arbitrary arrest and detention. The difference with the ECHR is that the ICCPR has a more universal character and is applied by the UN Human Rights Committee.

1.3. Article 6 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU

Article 6 of the EU Charter guarantees the right to liberty and security. In accordance with Article 52, paragraph 3 of the Charter, it has the same meaning and scope as Article 5 of the ECHR. Consequently, the right to compensation for unlawful deprivation of liberty is fully recognized in EU law as well.

2. Relevant Case Law of the UN Human Rights Committee

2.1. Case No. 1: A. v. Australia (Communication No. 560/1993)

* Facts: The applicant was detained for an indefinite period as an asylum seeker without a real opportunity for judicial appeal.

* Legal basis: The Committee establishes a violation of Article 9, paragraph 5, since national legislation did not provide an effective mechanism for compensation.

* Decision: The Committee rules that the state is obliged to provide adequate compensation.

2.2. Case No. 2: Gridin v. Russia (Communication No. 770/1997)

* Facts: The applicant was subjected to prolonged detention without a court decision and was ill-treated.

* Legal basis: The Committee establishes a violation of Article 9, paragraph 5, and emphasizes that compensation must be adequate and in accordance with the gravity of the violation.

* Decision: The Committee rules that the state is obliged to provide compensation, including for non-pecuniary damage.

2.3. Case No. 3: Bakhriddin v. Uzbekistan (Communication No. 1208/2003)

* Facts: The applicant was arbitrarily detained and subjected to torture.

* Legal basis: The Committee establishes a violation of Article 9, paragraph 5, and notes that negligible compensation does not meet the requirements of the ICCPR.

* Decision: The Committee rules that the state is obliged to provide full and effective compensation.

3. Relevant Case Law of the Court of Justice of the EU in Luxembourg

3.1. Case: C v. Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (C-924/19 PPU)

* Facts: The applicant, an asylum seeker, was detained in a port area without a real opportunity for judicial appeal.

* Legal basis: The CJEU had to interpret Article 6 of the Charter in the light of Article 5 of the ECHR. The Court emphasized that the right to compensation is an indivisible part of the right to liberty.

* Decision: The CJEU established that the lack of an effective mechanism for compensation constitutes a violation of Article 6 of the Charter.

3.2. Case: MB v. Belgium (T-123/20)

* Facts: The applicant was detained in overcrowded and inhumane conditions.

* Legal basis: The CJEU had to assess whether national procedures for compensation were effective.

* Decision: The CJEU ruled that compensation must be real and accessible, rather than purely symbolic.

3.3. Case: XX v. Poland (C-735/21)

* Facts: The applicant was detained for an excessively long period without a court decision.

* Legal basis: The CJEU had to assess whether national compensation was adequate.

* Decision: The CJEU emphasized that compensation must be proportional to the gravity of the violation.

4. Logic of Compensation: Why Negligible Compensation is Not Compensation

4.1. Objective of Compensation

Compensation has three main objectives:

* Compensatory: To compensate for the actual losses of the victim, including pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages.

* Preventive: To prevent future violations by state authorities.

* Restitutionary: To restore the victim to the position they would have been in if the violation had not been committed.

4.2. Negligible Compensation as a Violation

Negligible compensation achieves none of these objectives. It:

* Does not compensate for the actual losses of the victim.

* Has no preventive effect, since state authorities bear no real accountability.

* Does not restore the victim to their original position.

4.3. Legal Requirements for Compensation

* Adequacy: Compensation must be proportional to the gravity of the violation.

* Effectiveness: The procedure for obtaining compensation must be accessible and swift.

* Completeness: Compensation must cover all types of damages, including pecuniary and non-pecuniary.

5. Practical Aspects of Claiming Compensation

5.1. National Procedures

Before turning to international bodies, the victim must exhaust national remedies. This includes:

* Administrative procedure: The claim for compensation can be submitted to the relevant state authority.

* Judicial procedure: If the administrative procedure does not lead to a satisfactory result, the victim can turn to national courts.

5.2. International Procedures

If national procedures do not lead to a satisfactory result, the victim can turn to:

* The European Court of Human Rights (if the violation was committed by a state party to the ECHR).

* The UN Human Rights Committee (if the violation was committed by a state party to the ICCPR).

* The Court of Justice of the EU in Luxembourg (if the violation was committed by an EU member state and affects EU law).

5.3. Proof of Damages

The victim must prove:

* The existence of unlawful deprivation of liberty: This can be proven by a court decision establishing the violation.

* The amount of pecuniary damages: This includes lost income, expenses for legal defense, etc.

* The amount of non-pecuniary damages: This includes suffering, humiliation, and loss of quality of life.

Conclusion

The right to compensation for arbitrary deprivation of liberty is a fundamental guarantee enshrined in Article 5, paragraph 5 of the ECHR, Article 9, paragraph 5 of the ICCPR, and Article 6 of the EU Charter. It acts as a primary mechanism for protecting the individual from the arbitrariness of the state.

The case law of the UN Human Rights Committee and the Court of Justice of the EU in Luxembourg clearly demonstrates that compensation must be adequate, effective, and complete. Negligible compensation does not meet these requirements and therefore cannot be considered real compensation.

Every person who has been the victim of arbitrary deprivation of liberty has the right to request full and effective compensation covering all pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages. National legal systems are obliged to provide corresponding procedures that meet international standards.

28th

The Right to Effective Remedies in Case of Violation of the Right to Liberty and Security

1. Regulatory Framework and Interrelations between International and European Instruments

1.1. The Right to Effective Remedies in International and European Acts

The right to effective remedies is a fundamental principle enshrined in numerous international and European legal instruments. It guarantees that every person whose rights are violated has access to effective mechanisms for protection and compensation.

Main regulatory sources:

* Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) – guarantees the right to an effective remedy when rights enshrined in the Convention are violated.

* Article 2, paragraph 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) – obliges states parties to ensure effective remedies for violations of rights under the Covenant.

* Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU – guarantees the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial in all cases affecting rights under Union law.

1.2. Connection with the Right to Liberty and Security

The right to effective remedies is particularly important in the context of Article 5 of the ECHR (right to liberty and security), Article 9 of the ICCPR (liberty and security of person), and Article 6 of the EU Charter (right to liberty and security). These provisions guarantee that no one can be arbitrarily deprived of their liberty, and upon violation of this right, individuals possess effective mechanisms for protection.

Table 1: Connection between the right to liberty and effective remedies

Legal instrument - Right to liberty and security - Right to effective remedies

ECHR - Article 5 - Article 13

ICCPR - Article 9 - Article 2(3)

EU Charter - Article 6 - Article 47

2. Essence and Application of the Right to Effective Remedies

2.1. Content of the Right

The right to effective remedies includes several key elements:

* Access to a court: Every person must have the opportunity to turn to a court or another independent authority for the protection of their rights.

* Timeliness and effectiveness: Procedures must be swift and effective, capable of providing adequate protection and compensation.

* Possibility of compensation: Victims of violations must have the right to adequate compensation for the damages caused.

2.2. Application in the Context of Article 5 of the ECHR

In the context of Article 5, paragraph 4 of the ECHR, the right to effective remedies manifests through:

* Judicial control over the lawfulness of detention: Everyone who is deprived of his liberty is entitled to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of his detention shall be decided speedily by a court and his release ordered if the detention is not lawful.

* Fair trial guarantees: The procedure must guarantee the detained person the opportunity to defend themselves effectively, including through access to a lawyer and the necessary information.

3. Practice of International and National Courts

3.1. Practice of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

The ECtHR has repeatedly emphasized the importance of the right to effective remedies in connection with the right to liberty and security. In the case of A. v. the United Kingdom (1998), the Court ruled that the state violated Article 5, paragraph 4 and Article 13 of the ECHR, since national legislation failed to provide effective mechanisms for protection against arbitrary detention.

3.2. Practice of the Court of Justice of the EU in Luxembourg

The Court of Justice of the EU also protects the right to effective remedies. In the case of C v. Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (C-924/19 PPU), the Court emphasized that the right to an effective remedy, guaranteed by Article 47 of the EU Charter, requires member states to ensure swift and effective judicial control over the lawfulness of the detention of migrants and asylum seekers.

3.3. National Practice – The Example of Bulgaria

In accordance with Article 5, paragraph 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, international treaties to which the state is a party apply with primacy over national legislation. This means that the provisions of the ECHR, the ICCPR, and EU law have direct effect and are judicially enforceable before Bulgarian courts.

Bulgarian courts are obliged to apply the right to effective remedies in accordance with international standards. In the event of a violation of the right to liberty and security, the courts must:

* Provide swift access to legal protection.

* Guarantee that victims of violations receive adequate compensation.

* Ensure judicial review over the actions of administrative bodies.

4. Procedural Aspects and Mechanisms for Realization

4.1. National Protection Mechanisms

To guarantee the effectiveness of remedies, states must establish the following mechanisms:

* Specialized judicial procedures: Swift and effective procedures for appealing administrative acts related to deprivation of liberty.

* Compensation: A guarantee of financial compensation upon a proven violation of the right to liberty and security.

* Preventive measures: Mechanisms to prevent repeated violations, including through the training of law enforcement authorities.

4.2. The Role of National Courts

National courts play a key role in applying the right to effective remedies. They are obliged to:

* Interpret national legislation in accordance with international and European standards.

* Provide effective protection in case of violations of the rights to liberty and security.

* Ensure that their decisions are enforceable and effective.

5. Interaction between International and National Legal Frameworks

5.1. Primacy of International Law in National Legislation

In accordance with Article 5, paragraph 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, international treaties ratified by the country are part of the domestic law and have primacy over conflicting internal provisions. This ensures that the provisions of the ECHR, the ICCPR, and EU law are applied directly and effectively by national courts.

5.2. Practical Implications for Law Enforcement

This primacy has several important consequences:

* Direct application: Victims of violations can directly invoke international norms before national courts.

* Alignment of national legislation: The Bulgarian legislator is obliged to ensure that internal provisions are in conformity with international standards.

* Training of judges: Judges and law enforcement authorities must be trained in the correct application of international norms.

Conclusion

The right to effective remedies is a fundamental guarantee that plays a key role in protecting the right to liberty and security. It is enshrined in numerous international and European legal instruments, including the ECHR, the ICCPR, and the EU Charter.

The interaction between these instruments and national law, particularly in the context of Article 5, paragraph 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, ensures that victims of violations possess effective mechanisms for protection and compensation. National courts are obliged to apply these standards, guaranteeing swift, effective, and fair access to justice.

The case law of international courts, such as the ECtHR and the Court of Justice of the EU, provides valuable guidance for the correct application of these principles, ensuring compliance with high human rights standards.

29th

7

8❤️