003-6057733-7792272

issued by the Registrar of the Court   ECHR 140 (2018)   12.04.2018   Judgments and decisions of 12 April 2018   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing six judgments1 and 31 decisions2:   two Chamber judgments are summarised below; a separate press release has been issued for one   other Chamber judgment in the case of Chim and Przywieczerski v. Poland (application   nos. 36661/07 and 38433/07);   a separate press release has also been issued for one decision, in the case of Sakskoburggotski and   Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 38948/10, 55777/12, and 8954/17);   three Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been submitted to the Court,   and the 30 other decisions, can be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.   The judgments below are available only in English.   Goran Kovačević v. Croatia (application no. 34804/14)   The applicant, Goran Kovačević, is a Croatian national who was born in 1981 and lives in Dubrovnik   (Croatia).   The case concerned Mr Kovačević’s allegation of police ill-treatment, denial of access to a lawyer and   of being forced to make incriminating statements against his co-accused in the trial.   Mr Kovačević was arrested on 21 October 2010. The following day, he confessed during questioning   to having sold amphetamines and bought cocaine from one of his co-accused. He repeated his   confession to the investigating judge and was released. According to the two reports on his   questioning by the police and by the investigating judge, he had sustained minor injuries when   resisting the police during his arrest, as confirmed by a doctor. He had also been advised of his right   to remain silent and to a hire a lawyer. He had, however, refused to hire a lawyer of his own   choosing and had signed both reports without objections.   He eventually hired a lawyer in December 2010 and his case went to trial in January 2011. Six   months later, at the end of the trial, he stated that he had been beaten both during his arrest and at   the police station. He also retracted his confession about buying cocaine, alleging that it had been   made under duress. The trial court, dismissing these allegations as lacking credibility, found   Mr Kovačević guilty and sentenced him to two years in prison. His conviction was upheld by the   Supreme Court in 2012 and his sentenced reduced to one year. His constitutional complaint was   dismissed as ill-founded in 2013.   Relying in particular on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) (right to a fair trial and right to legal assistance of own   choosing) of the European Convention on Human Rights, Mr Kovačević alleged that his trial had not   been fair because he had been denied access to a lawyer and pressured into making incriminating   statements against his co-accused.   Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber   judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a   panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and   deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the   Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.   Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.   Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution   Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.   No violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c)   Bektashi Community and Others v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of   Macedonia” (nos. 48044/10, 75722/12, and 25176/13)   The applicants are the Bektashi Community, a religious association, and two of its members, Mr E.   Brahimaj, an Albanian national, and Mr A. Sulejmani, a Macedonian national. They both live in ‘the   former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’, in Tetovo and Gostivar. Mr E. Brahimaj holds the highest   position in the hierarchy of the community.   The case concerned their complaint that, when new legislation entered into force in 2007, the   domestic courts had refused to allow the association to retain its status as a religious organisation   and to accept its fresh application for registration.   The applicant association operated as an officially recognised religious organisation from 1993.   When new legislation on the legal status of churches, religious communities and groups entered into   force in 2007, the association requested that the registration court recognise its continuing legal   status. Its request was however refused on a formal ground, namely it had not been registered prior   to 1998, but only listed in 2000. It then made a fresh application for registration under the new   legislation, but in 2010 this request was also refused, mainly because the courts found that its name   and doctrinal sources were identical to those of another already registered religious organisation   and that this could create confusion among believers.   Relying in particular on Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion) and Article 11   (freedom of assembly and association) of the European Convention, the applicants complained   about the domestic courts’ decisions refusing to recognise the association as a religious organisation   or to register it anew.   Violation of Article 11 read in the light of Article 9 – in respect of the applicant association   Just satisfaction: 5,000 euros (EUR) (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 2,000 (costs and expenses) to   the applicant association.   This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,   judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. To receive   the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here: www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter   @ECHR_Press.   Press contacts   [email protected] | tel: +33 3 90 21 42 08   Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)   Denis Lambert (tel: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)   Inci Ertekin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 55 30)   Patrick Lannin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 44 18)   Somi Nikol (tel: + 33 3 90 21 64 25)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member   States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.   2