RIZEA v. ROMANIA
Inadmissible
Alvina Gyulumyan;Ján Šikuta;Josep Casadevall;Kristina Pardalos;Luis López Guerra
1. The applicant, Mr Vasile Rizea, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1953 and lives in Pitești. He was represented before the Court by Ms E. D. Dragomir, a lawyer practising in Bucharest. 2. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs I. Cambrea, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 3. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 4. The applicant was involved in a fraud case against S.L., G.N., M.M. and M.N. concerning the sale of a house. The applicant's civil complaints made the object of the case files no. 3387/P/2000 and no. 486/P/2000. 5. On 28 January 2003 the applicant and P.C. lodged a criminal complaint and a joined civil claim against twenty-one public administration officers and the four above-mentioned private persons for alleged corruption with the National Anticorruption Office. 6. On 26 May 2003 the National Anticorruption Office remitted the applicant's complaint to the Pitești Court of Appeal. The prosecutor stated that an analysis of the applicant's complaint had disclosed no clues or information warranting an investigation of the alleged crimes by an anticorruption prosecutor. 7. On 30 May 2003 the prosecutor examined the applicant's complaint and recommended that it be treated as a complaint against the prosecutor's decisions in the fraud cases 3387/P/2000 and 486/P/2000. He confirmed that there was no evidence that the public administration officers (including judges, prosecutors) had committed the alleged corruption offences. 8. According to the Government, the prosecutor dismissed the applicant's complaint on 18 June 2003. The applicant complained before the Pitești District Court. His complaint was dismissed on 7 October 2004. The judgment of the first-instance court was confirmed by the Argeș County Court which dismissed the applicant's appeal on points of law on 28 March 2005. 9. On 16 March 2004 the applicant reiterated his complaint against the 25 perpetrators. His complaint was registered as file no. 527/2003. 10. On 23 March 2004 the prosecutor informed the applicant that his complaint did not disclose other acts than those invoked in case files no. 3387/P/2000 and 486/P/2000. 11. Unsatisfied with a decision allegedly delivered by the prosecutor attached to the Pitești Court of Appeal on 3 June 2003, the applicant and P.C. lodged a complaint before the Pitești Court of Appeal. The court dismissed the action for lack of substance on 15 April 2004. It noted that the applicant's complaints in the fraud cases 3387/P/2000 and 486/P/2000 were still pending before the prosecutor's office and no decision to discontinue the criminal proceedings had been delivered on 3 June 2003. 12. By a decision of 29 June 2004, the High Court of Cassation and Justice upheld the first-instance judgment dismissing the action. 13. In the meantime, the examination of the applicant's first complaint was pending and would eventually result in the decision delivered by the Argeș County Court on 28 March 2005 (see paragraph 8 above). 14. The relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the initiation of a civil action related to criminal proceedings are the following: “The object of a civil action is to establish civil liability against the defendant and any other party that bears civil liability. A civil action may be joined to a criminal action within a criminal trial if the injured person claims for damages as a civil party (...)”. “The injured person may join the proceedings as a civil party against the accused person or the defendant and against the party that bears civil liability. Joining the proceedings as a civil party may be done either during the criminal investigation or in court, before the charges are read out (...)”. “An injured person who did not sue for civil injury in the criminal trial may bring an action in the civil court for compensation for the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage caused by the offence. The civil trial shall be postponed until a final decision has been given in the criminal case (...)”. “The injured person who can sue for civil injury in the criminal trial may initiate an action in the civil court if the criminal court, by its final decision, has not solved the civil action (...)”.