Mistreatment at the police station suspected - the Ombudsman turns to the Prosecutor General

The Commissioner for Fundamental Rights has requested the Prosecutor General to launch a criminal procedure because of suspicion of mistreatment in official proceedings upon having inquired, together with his Deputy responsible for the rights of nationalities living in Hungary, into a complaint submitted by an almost 70 years old person of Roma descent. The police searched the complainant's house then arrested him. According to his complaint, he was mistreated at the Gyömrő Police Station, but neither the police station, nor the supervising police headquarters, nor the Pest Regional Investigative Prosecution Service would conduct a proper inquiry into the matter.

Based on the documents at their disposal, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights and his Deputy have established that the complainant was arrested because of his alleged resistance to the search of his house. According to the law, however, it does not provide grounds for arresting someone. The complainant's resistance was broken anyway by the use of physical restraint and handcuffs (the latter were soon removed); therefore, the continuation of the search was not hindered in any way. Notwithstanding, the complainant was arrested by the police, although he was interrogated as a witness, not as a suspect. He could have been subpoenaed as a witness afterwards; therefore, in the Ombudsman's view, his arrest was unlawful.

In the "Statement" part of the police's arrest report, the complainant stated that his injuries had occurred as a result of the police's actions and that he had not received medical treatment. However, his statement was not taken into account either by the Head of the Gyömrő Police Station or by the Chief of the Monor Police Headquarters in the course of their inquiries into the incident. Furthermore, the Head of the Police Station claimed in his report, contrary to the case's documentation, that the complainant had stated that he had not suffered any injuries. In fact, because of the pain he had been suffering, the elderly gentleman visited (the same evening) the medical emergency unit and (the following morning) the traumatology of the local hospital; afterwards, his physician had him transported in an ambulance to the Trauma Centre in Budapest where he underwent medical treatment for five days.

In their joint report, the Ombudsman and his Deputy responsible for the rights of nationalities living in Hungary have stated that the staff of the Gyömrő Police Station gravely infringed upon the complainant's right to personal freedom and human dignity. The Deputy Head and the Head of the Police Station failed to acknowledge the infringement; furthermore, in their reports, they made statements contrary to the case's documentation. The Commissioner has requested the Chief of the Pest County Police Headquarters to ensure that police units under his supervision should make arrests taking into account the legal conditions, and that reports on mistreatment by the police should be investigated as thoroughly as possible.

The Pest Regional Investigative Prosecution Service launched a criminal procedure in May 2012, but no investigative actions were taken for seven months, and the complainant was not questioned but nine and a half months later. According to the elderly gentleman's statement, he was hit by the arresting police officer and a plain‑cloth detective; as a result, he fell in between the chairs and he was kicked several times while on the ground. Of all the police personnel concerned, only the then Deputy Head of the Station was interrogated, the arresting officers were not. The first instance decision dismissed the investigation in October 2013 claiming that, based on the evidence at hand, some of the complainant's injuries might have occurred during a lawful police action and that the expert opinion could not confirm the complainant's statement.

However, the medical reports showed that the complainant had suffered injuries with a recovery time of up to eight days. The report of the forensic medical expert clearly stated that the bruises could have occurred as a result of being beaten or even kicked, and one could not rule out the possibility that they had occurred when the complainant had fallen in between the chairs. According to the Ombudsman, the findings of the medical expert's report fully confirm the complainant's statement. The mistakes of the first instance proceedings and the first instance decision were not corrected by the Prosecution Service proceeding in the second instance, either.

By virtue of the Ombudsman Act, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights may not investigate the proceedings of the Prosecution Service. That is the reason why the Ombudsman has requested the Prosecutor General to investigate the suspicion of mistreatment in official proceedings since, although the time passed by would make proving it difficult, the proceeding Prosecution Service gravely infringed on the complainant's right to a fair procedure. The joint report of the Commissioner and his Deputy has pointed out, however, that the complainant was not subjected to any discrimination based on nationality background in the course of the prosecution's investigation.

The Ombudsman has uncovered another problem. According to the prevailing regulations, the police shall notify the complainants of the availability of victim assistance. In the view of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, it infringes on the right to fair procedure that the investigative prosecution service is not subject to such obligation. László Székely has requested the Prosecutor General to create the proper conditions for notifying the complainants.