Man given 3 months’ detention for a crime he didn’t commit - and reforms to protect the right to liberty

I. I. v. Bulgaria  | 2005

Man given 3 months’ detention for a crime he didn’t commit - and reforms to protect the right to liberty

… his joints swelled, he started feeling pain in his ankles, and could not move the fingers of his right hand.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights


I.I. was charged with a crime that he did not commit and put in pre-trial detention. The court which ordered his detention refused to examine the substance of the case, as it failed to examine issues related to the sufficiency of evidence against the applicant.

I.I.’s detention facility was overcrowded, and his damp, underground cell had no access to sunlight or fresh air. He slept on a wooden plank in a 6m2 cell that he shared with two or three other detainees. There was no proper shower or toilet and he had to relieve himself in a bucket in front of his cellmates. I.I. also had a skin condition which required good hygiene and exposure to sunlight. His condition became much worse and he also developed eczema and arthritis. Nevertheless, he was refused proper access to his medication. 

After three months, the case against I. I. was dropped and he was released. 

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

The European court ruled that the decision to put I.I. in detention had been taken without examining whether the evidence against him was sufficient, or the other relevant arguments about whether he should be deprived of his liberty. The process had also not been properly independent and impartial. Finally, the prison conditions in which I.I. had been kept had been inadequate.

This breached his basic rights. 


I.I. was paid 4,000 euros in compensation.

As a result of a series of similar cases, the law was changed in Bulgaria to protect the right to liberty. Major changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure meant that pre-trial detention is only allowed when there is a real danger of the accused absconding or re-offending. The accused also has the right to have their pre-trial detention reviewed by an independent judge within 72 hours.

Related examples

Almost three years’ imprisonment for a crime he did not commit – and reforms to protect liberty

Wrongfully accused of murder and attempted burglary, Andrzej Leszczak was detained for almost three years before finally being acquitted at trial. The European court ruled that the Polish authorities had not given proper reasons for holding Mr Leszczak and had not explored different ways of making sure he attended his trial. Following a series of such cases, Poland changed laws to protect...

Read more

Arbitrary detention in psychiatric hospital leads to reforms to protect liberty

Frits Winterwerp was detained in a psychiatric hospital. He said that he was not mentally ill and he should be released. However, he was repeatedly prevented from making his case in the Dutch courts, which kept extending his detention without hearing from him. The European court ruled this had violated his right to liberty. Reforms were made to protect people in Mr Winterwerp’s situation.

Read more

Legal reforms after innocent hotel director was jailed for 14 months without proper evidence

Hotel director Juozas Jėčius was held for over 14 months whilst awaiting trial for murder. However, there had never been any proper evidence against him, and he was acquitted at trial. The Strasbourg court ruled that Mr Jėčius’ incarceration had violated his right to liberty. Following the Court’s judgment, new measures were introduced to help avoid unjustified detention.

Read more

Reforms to prevent detention without a court’s permission

Allar Harkmann was arrested and detained, without a court hearing his case or examining the legality of his detention. He was only released after 15 days. The Strasbourg court ruled that the failure to have Mr Harkmann’s detention promptly reviewed by a judge, and the lack of any opportunity for him to obtain compensation, had violated his right to liberty.

Read more

Woman’s 4-year detention without trial leads to freedom protections

Josette Prencipe was in her mid-sixties when she was arrested and detained for almost 4 years, without facing trial. She was accused of making illegal bank transfers. The Strasbourg court ruled that the authorities had breached Mrs Prencipe’s right to liberty. The case triggered a series of reforms, including a new time limit on pre-trial detention.

Read more

Changes to legal procedures after detainee denied the opportunity to make his case in court

Peter Frommelt asked to be released whilst awaiting trial for financial crimes. When this was considered on appeal, neither he nor his lawyer were allowed to make any legal arguments. The Strasbourg court ruled that this had been unfair. The procedures were changed, allowing people to make comments to a court in such circumstances.

Read more

There must be proper rules on detention without trial

Giuseppe Toniolo was detained in San Marino for five weeks whilst awaiting extradition. The Strasbourg court ruled that the law in San Marino did not set out clear rules for his imprisonment, meaning that he could be detained arbitrarily and could not effectively make a claim to be released.

Read more