CASE OF ROMANESCU v. ROMANIADISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE WOJTYCZEK
Doc ref: • ECHR ID:
Document date: May 16, 2017
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE WOJTYCZEK
1. I expressed my opinion on the temporal scope of the application of the Convention in my separate opinions appended to the judgments in the cases of Janowiec and Others v. Russia ([GC] (nos. 55508/07 and 29520/09, ECHR 2013) and Mocanu and Others v. Romania ([GC], nos. 10865/09 , 45886/07 and 32431/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts)). In those two separate opinions I explained in detail why, in my view, the Convention does not impose on the High Contracting Parties the obligation to investigate events which pre-dated the entry into force of that instrument in respect of individual States.
2. The events, which the applicant said had not been properly investigated, took place before the entry into force of the Convention in respect of Romania. Finding a violation of the Convention in the instant case amounts to retroactively imposing treaty obligations on the High Contracting Party without a legal basis.
LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
