Rule 9 Communication to the Council of Europe: Non-execution of the ECtHR judgment in Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary

The Hungarian Helsinki Committee submitted a communication to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe regarding the non-execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights  in the Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary case, in which the HHC was the applicant.

The Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary case concerned the violation of the HHC’s freedom to receive information as a non-governmental organisation on account of the authorities’ refusal, in 2009, to provide it with the names of ex officio (legal aid) defence counsels and the number of their appointments for a research study on the efficiency of the legal aid system in criminal procedures. The Grand Chamber held in the case, among others, that “the information sought by the applicant NGO from the relevant police departments was necessary for the completion of the survey on the functioning of the public defenders’ scheme being conducted by it in its capacity as a non-governmental human-rights organisation, in order to contribute to discussion on an issue of obvious public interest”, and that “any restrictions on the applicant NGO’s proposed publication – which was intended to contribute to a debate on a matter of general interest – would have required the utmost scrutiny”. The European Court of Human Rights decided that by denying the applicant access to the requested information, the domestic authorities impaired the exercise of its freedom to receive and impart information, “in a manner striking at the very substance of its Article 10 rights”, and established a violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights on freedom of expression.

Since the judgment in the case was rendered by the European Court of Human Rights, the system of ex officio (legal aid) appointments in criminal procedures has changed considerably in Hungary, but the HHC received anecdotal evidence that the current system is still abused by the police, undermining the right to effective defence. Therefore, the HHC submitted a series of freedom of information requests to the police to obtain information on the functioning of the new system, asking the police to take into account the judgment issued by the European Court of Human Rights, in the Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary case when providing their reply. However, all police headquarters approached refused to provide the data asked for in the freedom of information requests.

In its submission, the HHC argued that from the aspect of the HHC’s freedom to receive and impart information as a human rights watchdog organisation, the consequences of these refusals are the same as in the Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary case:

• the applicant HHC in its capacity as a non-governmental human rights organisation monitoring the system of the ex officio (legal aid) system in criminal procedures has anecdotal evidence that the system is abused;
• the information sought by the HHC from the police would be necessary for the assessment of the functioning of the new scheme of ex officio (legal aid) appointments in criminal procedures being conducted by it in its capacity as a non-governmental human rights organisation, in order to contribute to a discussion on an issue of obvious public interest, involving whether the state ensures the right to effective defence, and the respective data is possessed exclusively by the police;
• but the HHC is refused access to the data in question by the police.

Accordingly, in the HHC’s view, the judgment in the Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary case cannot be considered executed.

The HHC’s communication to the Committee of Ministers is available here:
Rule 9(2) communication in the Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v Hungary case