Grand Chamber judgment Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria

2004 news

2003 news

2002 news

Additional information:

ECHR website

Text of Grand Chamber judgment Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights upheld the Court decision in the judgment of Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria in the case of the shooting of two Romani army conscripts by military police in 1996. Kuncho Angelov and Kiril Petkov were shot in a village after escaping from their military service unit.

The Court held:

- unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of the deaths of Kuncho Angelov and Kiril Petkov;

- unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention in that the authorities had failed to conduct an effective investigation into the deaths of Mr Angelov and Mr Petkov;

- by eleven votes to six that there had been no violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 2 of the Convention in respect of the allegation that the events leading to the deaths of Mr Angelov and Mr Petkov constituted an act of racial violence;

- unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 2 of the Convention in that the authorities had failed to investigate possible racist motives behind the events that had led to the deaths of Mr Angelov and Mr Petkov;

- unanimously that no separate issue arose under Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the Convention.

In its Chamber judgment of 26 February 2004 the Court held unanimously that there had been violations of Article 2 on account of the shooting of Mr Angelov and Mr Petkov and the failure to conduct an effective investigation into their deaths. It also found violations of Article 14 taken together with Article 2 on account of both the shootings and the failure to investigate whether they had been racially motivated.

On 21 May 2004 the Bulgarian Government requested that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber. The panel of the Grand Chamber accepted the request on 7 July 2004. A hearing was held in public at the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on 23 February 2005.

Principal facts

The applicants, Anelia Nachova and her mother Aksiniya Hristova, Todorka Rangelova and Rangel Rangelov, are Bulgarian nationals of Roma origin. They were born in 1995, 1978, 1955 and 1954 respectively.

The case concerns the killing on 19 July 1996 of the applicants' relatives, Kuncho Angelov (father of Ms Nachova) and Kiril Petkov (son of Ms Rangelova and Mr Rangelov), both aged 21, by a military policeman who was trying to arrest them.

Mr Angelov and Mr Petkov were both conscripts in a division of the army dealing with the construction of apartment blocks and other civilian projects. Early in 1996 they had been arrested for repeated absences without leave. On 22 May 1996 Mr Angelov was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment and Mr Petkov to five months' imprisonment. Both had previous convictions for theft.

On 15 July 1996 they escaped from a construction site where they were working and went to the home of Mr Angelov's grandmother in Lesura. Neither was armed.

On 19 July 1996 the commanding officer in the Vratsa Military-Police Unit, Colonel D., sent four military police officers, under the command of Major G., to arrest the two men. At least two of the officers knew one or both of the men. Colonel D. told the officers that "in accordance with the rules" they should carry their handguns and automatic rifles and wear bullet-proof vests. He informed them that Mr Angelov and Mr Petkov were "criminally active" - an expression used to describe people with previous convictions or those suspected of committing offences - and that they had escaped from detention. The officers were instructed to use all necessary means to arrest them.

When the police arrived at Mr Angelov's grandmother's house, the two men tried to escape. After warning them that he would shoot if they did not surrender, Major G. shot them down using his automatic rifle. They were taken to Vrasta Hospital, where they were pronounced dead on arrival.

An eyewitness claimed that, because his grandson - a young boy - had been in the area where the shooting occurred, he had asked Major G. for permission to approach and remove him from danger. Major G. had pointed his gun at him, saying: "You damn Gypsies!".

A criminal investigation into the deaths was opened the same day. The autopsy report found that both men had died from gunfire wounds, fired from an automatic rifle from a distance. Mr Petkov had been shot in the chest and Mr Angelov in the back. The investigation concluded that Major G. had followed Regulation 45 of the Military Police Regulations. He had warned the two men several times and fired shots in the air. He had shot them only because they had not surrendered, as there had been a danger they might escape, and he had tried to avoid inflicting fatal injuries. No one else had been hurt. On those grounds the authorities refused to prosecute the military police officers.

The applicants appealed unsuccessfully.

Decision of the Court

The Court noted as a matter of grave concern that the regulations on the use of firearms by the military police effectively permitted lethal force to be used when arresting a member of the armed forces for even the most minor offence. Not only were the regulations not published, they contained no clear safeguards to prevent the arbitrary deprivation of life.

Such a legal framework was fundamentally deficient and fell well short of the level of protection "by law" of the right to life that was required by the Convention in present-day democratic societies in Europe. The Court thus found that there had been a general failure by Bulgaria to comply with its obligation under Article 2 of the Convention to secure the right to life by putting in place an appropriate legal and administrative framework on the use of force and firearms by military police. Mr Angelov and Mr Petkov had been killed in circumstances in which any use of firearms to effect their arrest was incompatible with Article 2 of the Convention. Furthermore, grossly excessive force had been used. There had therefore been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention as regards the deaths of Mr Angelov and Mr Petkov.
The Grand Chamber agreed with the Chamber that the fact that the investigation had validated the use of force in the circumstances of the case only served to confirm the fundamentally defective nature of the regulations and their disregard of the right to life. The investigating authorities' failure to examine relevant matters in the file meant that there had not been any strict scrutiny of all the material circumstances.

A number of indispensable and obvious investigative steps had not been taken and the investigating authorities had ignored significant facts without seeking any proper explanation, preferring instead to accept Major G.'s statements and terminate the investigation. The investigator and the prosecutors had thus effectively shielded Major G. from prosecution.

The Grand Chamber endorsed the Chamber's view that such conduct on the part of the authorities - which had already been remarked on by the Court in previous cases against Bulgaria - was a matter of grave concern, as it cast serious doubt on the objectivity and impartiality of the investigators and prosecutors involved.

The Court awarded 25,000 euros to Kuncho Angelov's family and 22,000 euros to Kiril Petrov's family. It also awarded 11,000 euros for the applicant's court costs and expenses.

top