Hungarian Authorities' Cover Up of Brutal Police Interrogation Violated ECHR

The European Court of Human Rights has determined that the Hungarian authorities violated the fundamental human rights of a Roma man by covering up a coercive police interrogation.

The victim, a client of the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, was arrested and taken to a police station in 2010. Upon his release, he filed charges against the Hungarian authorities claiming that during the twelve hours of his arrest and interrogation he was brutally assaulted and humiliated by six policemen and two security guards so as to coerce a plea agreement from him.

The policemen told the man they "do not even care if you drop dead. At least there will be one less Gypsy." The incident had a devastating psychological impact on the man.

A few hours after his release from police custody, the man was hospitalised. According to the clinical evidence from the hospital, he sustained injuries to the skull, nose, shoulder, hip, arm, hand and thigh. An investigation initiated based on his allegations was terminated by the prosecutor's office, which maintained that it could not be established beyond reasonable doubt that the assault had, in fact, been committed by the suspects.

Institutional racism

Assisted by the HCLU, the injured party turned to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), claiming a violation of the prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights) and the principle of non-discrimination.

The European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) intervened in the proceedings in order to help the man's case. ERRC requested that the Court take into account the existence of institutional racism in the country.

The ECtHR's judgment held that the Hungarian government had failed to refute the plaintiff's claim that his injuries had been caused at the police station. Furthermore, the Strasbourg court maintained that the investigation conducted by the Hungarian authorities had not been effective, nor had it involved an examination of the potential racist motives of the abuse.

Share

Related articles

INCLO condemns police violence in Colombia and calls for meaningful police reform

Fourteen (14) member organizations of the International Network of Civil Liberties Organizations (INCLO) condemn the police repression of protests and the death of Javier Ordóñez in Bogota, Colombia on the night of 8-9 September at the hands of law enforcement. The video circulating on social media showed Ordóñez pinned to the ground by two police officers who shocked him repeatedly with a stun gun. Ordóñez, a father of two, died shortly afterward in police custody.

INCLO welcomes EU court ruling on Hungary's anti-NGO law

INCLO welcomes EU court ruling, calling on governments to revoke hostile NGO legislation and refrain from adopting such laws.

On the accusation of being a pseudo-NGO

The past few weeks have been full of the word “pseudo-NGO”. The government and leaders of the governing party have declared organisations critical of them “pseudo-NGOs”. According to more moderate views, they should be much more transparent than they are now, while according to more radical views, they should be completely eliminated. Those who do not agree with these politicians have retorted that it is in fact the foundations, associations and other professional platforms close to the government who are the real pseudo-NGOs. It is well-settled what it means to be an NGO. The definition of a pseudo-NGO, on the other hand, has not been fully explained. This expression is used in various contexts in the current debate. Let’s look at the typology of pseudo-NGOs!