issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 157 (2021)
20.05.2021
Judgments and decisions of 20 May 2021
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 17 judgments1 and 48 decisions2:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
separate press releases have been issued for three other Chamber judgments in the cases of:
Lapshin v. Azerbaijan (application no. 13527/18), Amaghlobeli and Others v. Georgia (no. 41192/11),
and Beg S.p.a. v. Italy (no. 5312/11);
a separate press release has also been issued for one decision in the case of Terhes v. Romania
(no. 49933/20);
12 Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been submitted to the Court, and
The judgments summarised below are available only in English.
Asanović v. Montenegro (application no. 52415/18)
The applicant, Nebojša Asanović, is a Montenegrin national who was born in 1965 and lives in
Podgorica.
The case concerns the serving, in September 2017, of a summons on the applicant, a practising
lawyer and long-standing representative of an opposition media outlet, outside the court where he
was about to plead in two hearings, by four officers, the summons specifying that if he did not
comply at once, he would be brought in by force. The applicant was suspected of tax evasion. Two
days later, the applicant lodged a constitutional appeal, claiming unlawful deprivation of liberty and
alleging that there had been no legal grounds for it, given that none of the reasons for detention had
been indicated, that there was no related criminal case-file and no relevant court decision.
Various claims followed, including prosecutorial and civil proceedings involving the applicant, the
State Tax Administration, the Ministry of Interior, the Police Department and the State Prosecution
Office.
Relying on Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of
the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicant complained that he had been unlawfully
de facto deprived of liberty and that he had had no effective domestic remedy in that regard.
Violation of Article 5 § 1
Just satisfaction:
No request for just satisfaction made
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
Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.
