CASE OF GOROU v. GREECE (No. 2)
Preliminary objections dismissed (ratione materiae);No violation of Art. 6-1;Violation of Art. 6-1;Non-pecuniary damage - award
Alvina Gyulumyan;András Sajó;Anatoly Kovler;Christos Rozakis;David Thór Björgvinsson;Dean Spielmann;Elisabeth Steiner;Françoise Tulkens;Giorgio Malinverni;Ineta Ziemele;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Josep Casadevall;Khanlar Hajiyev;Loukis Loucaides;Mark Villiger;Nicolas Bratza;Peer Lorenzen;Renate Jaeger;Sverre Erik Jebens;Vladimiro Zagrebelsky;Volodymyr Butkevych;Zdravka Kalaydjieva
10. The applicant is a civil servant in the Ministry of National Education. At the relevant time she was on secondment to the Bureau for the primary education of Greek children abroad, in the city of Stuttgart. On 2 June 1998 she filed a criminal complaint for perjury and defamation against S.M., with an application to join the proceedings as a civil party, but without claiming compensation. S.M., a civil servant in the same Ministry, was the applicant's immediate superior. She alleged in particular that, in connection with an administrative investigation opened against her, S.M. had stated that she did not observe working hours and did not get on well with her colleagues. 11. On 26 September 2001, when the case was heard before the Athens Criminal Court, the applicant reiterated her civil-party application, claiming 1,000 drachmas (about 3 euros) and adduced her arguments. On the same day, the Athens Criminal Court acquitted S.M. of the charges against him, finding that the applicant's allegations were unsubstantiated. In particular, after examining all the evidence, the court considered that the offending remarks had been truthful and that it had not been the defendant's intention to defame or insult the applicant (judgment no. 74941/2001). 12. On 5 August 2002 this judgment was finalised and entered in the register of the Criminal Court. 13. On 24 September 2002 the applicant requested the public prosecutor at the Court of Cassation to lodge an appeal on points of law against the Athens Criminal Court's judgment no. 74941/2001, under Article 506 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. She alleged, in particular, that the judgment did not contain sufficient reasoning. 14. On 27 September 2002 the public prosecutor at the Court of Cassation returned the applicant's letter with the following handwritten comment on the actual request: “There are no legal or well-founded grounds of appeal to the Court of Cassation”. 15. The Code of Criminal Procedure contains the following relevant provisions: “(1) The present Code specifies the instances in which a judge gives a decision or makes an order. Orders shall also be made by the public prosecutor where he has a statutory obligation to take measures during a judicial investigation in a case or when hearings have been adjourned by the court ...” “Judgments, orders of the chamber of judges, and orders of the investigating judge or of the public prosecutor shall give specific and precise reasons ... ... Even where it is not required by a specific provision, all judgments and orders shall include reasoning, whether they are final or interlocutory and whether or not they depend on the discretion of the judge hearing the case.” “Remedies may be used solely by persons who are expressly afforded such right by law ...” “(1) ... an appeal on points of law may be lodged (a) by the defendant; (b) by a third party whose civil liability has been engaged in the conviction judgment and who has acknowledged such liability; (c) by a civil party named in the conviction judgment, but only in respect of that part of the judgment in which he or she is awarded damages or is recognised as being entitled to compensation, or in which his or her claims have been dismissed as being devoid of legal basis; (d) by the public prosecutor. The Principal Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation shall be entitled to appeal on points of law against any decision within the time-limit provided for in Article 479 § 2 ...” “The quashing of an acquittal on points of law may be sought: (a) by the defendant, if he or she has been acquitted for expressing remorse; (b) by the principal public prosecutor ... if the acquittal has been the consequence of a misinterpretation of a substantive criminal-law provision within the meaning of Article 510 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; (c) by the person who laid the charge or the complainant, if he or she has been ordered to pay damages and costs.” “(1) ... The Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation shall summon the appellant in cassation and other parties to the proceedings, by a summons served on them in accordance with Articles 155 to 161 and within the time-limit provided for in Article 166, before the Court of Cassation or its plenary assembly ... (2) Where the appeal on points of law has been lodged by a public prosecutor, he shall not be summoned but shall be represented by the public prosecutor at the Court of Cassation. ...”