Communicated on 16 December 2013

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 55102/13 V.R . against Croatia lodged on 25 July 2013

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, V.R. , is a Croatian national, who was born in 1992 . The President granted the applicant ’ s request for his identity not to be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 3 of the Rules of Court ). He is represented before the Court by Ms L. Horvat , a lawyer practising in Zagreb .

The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

On 8 May 2013 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of sexual abuse and rape of a child.

On 10 May 2013 an investigating judge of the Z. County Court ordered his detention under Article 123 § 1(2) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (risk of collusion and risk of reoffending).

On 17 May 2013 the applicant appealed and on 21 May 2013 a three-judge panel of the Z. County Court dismissed his appeal as without merit.

On 6 June 2013 the investigating judge extended the applicant ’ s pre-trial detention under Article 123 § 1(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (risk of reoffending) .

The applicant appealed and on 14 June 2013 a three-judge panel of the Z. County Court dismissed his appeal as without merit .

On 5 July 2013 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ) challenging the decisions ordering and extending his pre-trial detention.

On the same date the applicant was indicted in the Z. Municipal Court on charges of sexual abuse and rape of a child.

On 8 July 2013 a three-judge panel of the Z. Municipal Court extended the applicant ’ s pre-trial detention under Article 123 § 1(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (risk of reoffending).

On 10 July 2013 the Constitutional Court declared the applicant ’ s constitutional complaint inadmissible on the grounds that a new decision on his detention had been adopted in the meantime on 8 July 2013 .

On 19 July 2013, upon the applicant ’ s appeal, a three-judge panel of the Z. County Court quashed the decision extending the applicant ’ s pre-trial detention on 8 July 2013 and remitted the case to the Z. Municipal Court for re-examination.

On 25 July 2013 the Z. Municipal Court released the applicant from detention , but imposed a number of conditions on his release .

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains, under Articles 5 § 4 and 13 of the Convention, that he was not able to obtain effective judicial review of the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention by the Constitutional Court.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Was the procedure by which the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention before the Constitutional Court in conformity with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention?

The Government are requested to submit two copies of the relevant documents concerning the decisions on the applicant ’ s detention.