Communicated on 22 April 2015

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 7753/13 Alexandru CUCU against the Republic of Moldova and 2 other applications (see list appended)

A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix.

A. The circumstances of the cases

The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

1. Application no. 7753/13

On 8 April 2009 the applicant was apprehended as part of a police operation aimed at re-establishing public order after protests of 6 and 7 April 2009 against alleged fraud at the general elections of 5 April 2009.

On 9 April 2009 the Buiucani District Court found the applicant guilty of opposing and disrespectful conduct towards a police officer and sentenced him to fifteen days of administrative arrest. The applicant appealed and on 18 May 2009 the Chișinău Court of Appeal finally quashed the judgment of the district court and discontinued the administrative proceedings in respect of the applicant for lack of corpus delicti .

Meanwhile, on 17 April 2009 the applicant was released.

The applicant brought an action under Law No. 1545 seeking 115,000 Moldovan lei (MDL) (equivalent to 6,765 euros (EUR)) in compensation for damage resulting from unlawful detention for ten days. On 11 December 2013 the Supreme Court of Justice concluded that the applicant ’ s administrative arrest had been unlawful and awarded him MDL 15,000 (equivalent to EUR 835) concluding that this amount was sufficient because he had previously received MDL 5,000 (equivalent to EUR 312) under a Government decree as compensation for the same damage. This judgment was final.

2. Application no. 75188/13

On 9 April 2009 the applicant was arrested as part of a police operation aimed at re-establishing public order after protests of 6 and 7 April 2009 against alleged fraud at the general elections of 5 April 2009. The applicant was charged with alleged participation in mass disorder actions.

On 11 April 2009 the Ciocana District Court ordered the applicant ’ s detention pending trial for thirty days . The applicant appealed and on 16 April 2009 the Chișinău Court of Appeal quashed the arrest warrant and released the applicant.

On 30 October 2009 the criminal proceedings in respect of the applicant were discontinued for lack of corpus delicti .

The applicant brought an action under Law No. 1545 seeking MDL 600,000 (equivalent to EUR 36,700) in compensation for damage resulting from unlawful detention for seven days. On 3 July 2013 the Supreme Court of Justice upheld the previous judgment which found that the applicant had been unlawfully detained for seven days and awarded the applicant MDL 7,000 (equivalent to EUR 428). This judgment was final.

3. Application no. 76511/14

In 2004 criminal proceedings were initiated in respect of the applicant on charges of fraud. In the course of proceedings, he was arrested from 15 to 18 April 2004 and from 28 July to 3 August 2005. On 30 March 2011 the Supreme Court of Justice finally discontinued the proceedings in respect of the applicant on the ground of procedural deficiencies which precluded the continuation of proceedings.

The applicant brought an action under Law No. 1545 seeking MDL 80,000 (equivalent to EUR 4,800) in compensation for damage resulting from unlawful detention for ten days. On 28 May 2014 the Supreme Court of Justice found that the applicant ’ s detention had been unlawful and awarded him MDL 6,000 (equivalent to EUR 317) for the violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention and for illegal acts of the criminal investigating authorities. This judgment was final.

B. Relevant domestic law and practice

Law No. 1545 of 25 February 1998 provides for compensation for damage caused by the illegal acts of the criminal investigating authorities, prosecution and courts (illegal arrest, detention and administrative arrest) to be paid to persons acquitted in criminal proceedings or in respect of whom criminal proceedings were terminated on rehabilitation grounds. The relevant provisions of the Law were set out in Sarban v. Moldova , no. 3456/05, § 54, 4 October 2005.

COMPLAINTS

The applicants complain that their right not to be arbitrarily deprived of liberty was infringed, in violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention.

The applicants also complain about the insufficient compensation for the non-pecuniary damage they sustained as a result of their unlawful detention, in breach of Article 5 § 5 of the Convention.

COMMON QUESTION S

Having regard to the amount awarded to the applicants for their unlawful deprivation of liberty, can they still claim to be victims of violations of Article 5 of the Convention? If so, do the facts of the cases, in particular the amount of compensation awarded to the applicants, disclose a violation of Article 5 § 5 of the Convention (see Ganea v. Moldova , no. 2474/06 , § 30 ‑ 31, 17 May 2011 and Cristina Boicenco v. Moldova , no. 25688/09 , § 43, 27 September 2011 )?

APPENDIX

No.

Application

no. and date of lodging

Applicant ’ s name,

date of birth,

place of residence,

representative

Length of unlawful detention

Amount of

compensation awarded by domestic courts

7753/13,

27/12/2012

Alexandru CUCU

born on 04/06/1990,

living in Chi ș inău , represented by

Alexei CROITOR

10 days

MDL 15,000

(EUR 835)

75188/13,

08/11/2013

Eugeniu TANASIEV

born on 19/03/1988,

living in Chi ș inău , represented by

Alexei CROITOR

7 days

MDL 7,000

(EUR 428)

76511/14,

28/11/2014

Vadim VLADARCIC

born on 02/02/1957,

living in Chi ș inău , represented by

Iurie OANCEA

10 days

MDL 6,000

(EUR 317)