Published on 3 January 2022

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 10797/18 Jairo Nicomedes Jose FRANS against the Netherlands lodged on 26 February 2018 communicated on 9 December 2021

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The applicant’s pre-trial detention, which started on 14 September 2017, was initially based on the existence of a reasonable suspicion that he had been complicit in narcotics manufacturing and on grounds relating to (1) a risk of reoffending and (2) the needs of the investigation.

On 20 October 2017, the Regional Court of The Hague found the applicant’s pre-trial detention unlawful for a technical reason, declared inadmissible the public prosecutor’s request to extend the applicant’s detention on remand, and thus lifted the pre-trial detention order. The prosecutor appealed against that decision. By interlocutory decision of 14 December 2017, the Court of Appeal of The Hague held that the Regional Court had wrongfully declared the prosecutor’s request inadmissible and ordered that the parties should be heard on that request. On 21 December 2017, the appellate court heard the parties, decided to allow the prosecutor’s request and ordered the applicant’s extended pre ‑ trial detention but held that the second ground mentioned above no longer obtained.

The applicant complained under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention that his pre-trial detention from 21 December 2017 onwards had been without adequate justification, or in the alternative, that the decision taken by the Court of Appeal had lacked sufficient reasons.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

Was the applicant’s pre-trial detention from 21 December 2017 onwards justified under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention? In particular, was the decision of the Court of Appeal of The Hague of that date sufficiently reasoned (see Clooth v. Belgium , 12 December 1991, §§ 36-37 and 40, Series A no. 225, Zohlandt v. the Netherlands , no. 69491/16, §§ 48-54, 9 February 2021, and Hasselbaink v. the Netherlands , no. 73329/16, §§ 67-73, 9 February 2021)?