CYIL 2012

ĽUBOMÍR MAJERČÍK ȃ ANNA MATUŠINOVÁ ȃ HUBERT SMEKAL CYIL 3 ȍ2012Ȏ extraordinary remedies as complicated and difficult to understand in a long line of cases dating back to 2002. 26 Therefore the ECtHR concluded in line with its settled reasoning that the dismissal of the complaint on the grounds of prematureness and later for lateness constituted an unacceptable denial of justice. In the second case concerning Article 6 of the Convention, the Constitutional Court rejected the complaint of Mr. Šurý 27 along the lines that, given the outcome of the Supreme Court review, the applicant did not comply with the requirements for the submission of the complaint. The ECtHR held that the interpretation of the requirements by the Constitutional Court had no basis in the Constitutional Court Act and barred the applicant from pursuing the constitutional complaint. For the first time in the long history of Czech cases dealing with the coexistence between the constitutional complaint and the appeal on points of law, the ECtHR applied its case law to criminal proceedings in the case of Janyr and Others. 28 Basically, the Constitutional Court found that the applicants should have known that the Supreme Court would reject their appeal and should have omitted this remedy. As they did resort to the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court dismissed their subsequent constitutional complaint on the basis of lateness. The ECtHR strongly criticized the formalism of the constitutional complaint procedure and the complexity and divergence of the relevant case law. 29 The ECtHR found the practice incompatible with the principle of legal certainty of applicants and therefore in violation of the right to a fair trial. For the first time in this line of cases, the ECtHR awarded the applicants 4,000 EUR for non-pecuniary damage. 8. When law serves criminals T he Breukhoven 30 case is among those few which are capable of creating excitement. A former Dutch owner of a night club in the Czech Republic was suspected of forced prostitution of girls whom he had lured from Romania. While Mr. Breukhoven left the Czech Republic and the state authorities were unaware of his whereabouts, five women who worked for him were questioned by police in the presence of a judge. Neither the applicant nor his lawyer was present during the questioning. 31 T he interrogation was conducted as an urgent measure because the alleged prostitutes 26 Běleš and Others v the Czech Republic App no 47273/99 (ECHR, November 2002), Zvolský and Zvolská v the Czech Republic App no 46129/99 (ECHR, November 2002), Vodárenská akciová společnost, a.s. v the Czech Republic App no 73577/01 (ECHR, February 2004). 27 Šurý v the Czech Republic App no 16299/10 (ECHR, October 2011). 28 Janyr and Others v the Czech Republic App no 12579/06 and 19007/10 and 34812/10 (ECHR, October 2011). 29 ECtHR pointed out that the Constitutional Court has the task to ensure logical consistency and predictability of its practice concerning procedural remedies which have to be employed before filing a constitutional complaint. Mutatis Mutandis para 34 in Faljtejsek v the Czech Republic App no 24021 (ECHR, May 2008).

30 Breukhoven v the Czech Republic App no 44438/06 (ECHR, July 2011). 31 A sixth witness was questioned later in the presence of the applicant’s lawyer.

286