CYIL vol. 15 (2024)

PETR KONŮPKA rules and practice, etc. The implementation of the Court’s judgments is supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. In the course of 2023, the Czech Republic had seven judgments “on the table” for implementation: D. H. and Others , 44 Komissarov , 45 B. Ű. , 46 Sládková , 47 Tempel , 48 Pálka and Others , 49 and Janáček . 50 The latter three judgments did not require adoption of general measures, as the more general problem underlying the violation found by the Court had already been remedied in the interim. In the Tempel case, the case law of the Constitutional Court clarified the matter, 51 in the Pálka and Others case, new legislation was adopted, 52 in the Janáček case, the internal working procedures of the Constitutional Court were adjusted. 53 Let’s take a closer look at two judgments that have seen significant developments over the past year. In principle, all the general measures needed to implement the judgment were taken in the Komissarov case. 54 In that judgment, the Court found a violation of Article 5 of the Convention: the applicant had been held in extradition detention for an excessively long period of time, as the statutory time limits for issuing a decision in parallel asylum proceedings had been exceeded, and the courts deciding on the applicant’s continued detention had failed to react to these delays. As of 1 July 2023, an amendment to the Asylum Act extended the time limit for the Ministry of the Interior to issue a decision on the asylum application of a person in extradition detention to 90 days. This new time limit should ensure that the asylum procedure can take place properly within this interval, which by its length should not cause unreasonably long detention, and that in practice there will be no breaches of the time limit. At the same time, the internal procedures of both the Ministry of the Interior (e.g., by establishing a special file marker to enable administrative courts to identify these types of cases immediately) and the courts (by establishing procedures for the transmission of information and training of specialised judges) have been modified so that, in future, asylum applications in these cases will indeed be processed expeditiously and that courts deciding on detention will properly examine whether there are delays in the asylum procedure and whether continued detention is still permissible in this light. A report on the execution of the judgment was submitted to the Committee of Ministers on 21 December 2023. 55 It is expected that the Committee of Ministers will close its supervision of the execution of the judgment during 2024.

44 Application no. 57325/00, judgment of the Grand Chamber of 13 November 2007. 45 Application no. 20611/17, judgment of 3 February 2022. 46 Application no. 9264/15, judgment of 6 October 2022. 47 Application no. 15741/15, judgment of 10 November 2022. 48 Application no. 44151/12, judgment of 25 June 2020. 49 Application no. 30262/13, judgment of 24 March 2022. 50 See footnote 2. 51 For a summary of the relevant case law, see judgment no. Pl. ÚS 110/20 of 27 July 2021.

52 See Act No. 184/2006 Sb., the Expropriation Act. 53 See §§ 33-34 of Janáček v. Czech Republic judgment . 54 See footnote 45.

55 The Action Report is available at: https://mezisoudy.cz/storage/files/tinyMCE/P%C5%99%C3%ADloha%20 %C4%8D.%202_Komissarov_zpr%C3%A1va%20o%20v%C3%BDkonu%20rozsudku_2023-12_21..pdf.

348