issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 327 (2014)
06.11.2014
Judgments concerning Germany, Malta and Slovenia
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following seven judgments, of
which five (in italics) are Committee judgments and are final. The others are Chamber judgments1
and are not final.
Repetitive cases2, with the Court’s main finding indicated, can be found at the end of the press
release. The judgments are available only in English.
The Court has also delivered today its judgment in the case of Dvořáček v. the Czech Republic (application no. 12927/13),
for which a separate press release has been issued.
Ereren v. Germany (application no. 67522/09)
The applicant, Faruk Ereren, is a stateless person who was born in 1955 and lives in Hagen
(Germany). The case concerned his complaint about the length of his pre-trial detention, which had
lasted for more than five years, on suspicion of having ordered terrorist attacks.
Mr Ereren was arrested in Germany in April 2007 for possession of forged documents. His detention
was subsequently ordered on the basis of a strong suspicion, in particular, that he had played a
leading role in the activities of a foreign terrorist organisation and of having committed two counts
of murder; it was extended on several occasions and his appeals against the arrest warrant were
rejected. The German courts held in particular that there was a risk of collusion and of absconding,
observing that Mr Ereren did not have a fixed residence in Germany. In September 2011, an appeal
court convicted him of two counts of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment, but the
judgment was subsequently quashed and the case was remitted for a fresh trial by another chamber
of the same court. After his detention had again been extended, Mr Ereren was eventually released
in February 2014, the criminal proceedings against him still pending.
Relying on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security / entitlement to trial within a reasonable time or
to release pending trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights, Mr Ereren complained that
the length of his pre-trial detention had been excessive.
No violation of Article 5 § 3
Azzopardi v. Malta (no. 28177/12)
The applicant, Peter Azzopardi, is a Maltese national who was born in 1950 and lives in Naxxar
(Malta). He is the director of the company Canadian Brothers Limited on whose behalf he lodged the
application.
The case concerned compensation proceedings in respect of the expropriation, in 1974, of a plot of
land of which the company had been the holder. The land was expropriated in order to construct a
reservoir. Mr Azzopardi contested the sum offered by the authorities for the acquisition and
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a judgment’s
delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five
judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final
judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention,
judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
2
In which the Court has reached the same findings as in similar cases raising the same issues under the Convention.
