When secret surveillance of suspects violate the limits of a fair trial
JUDGMENT
Grba v. Croatia 23.11.2017 (no. 47074/12)
SUMMARY
Police trap is denounced by the applicant, who was suspected by the authorities for counterfeiting currency. In this context, the prosecutor approved the follow-up of his telephone conversations, as well as his surveillance by secret police officers and the purchase of the last counterfeited currencies. The applicant was arrested and convicted, although he declared innocent of most of the acts attributed to him. Based on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) and Article 8 (right to respect for privacy, home and correspondence), he particularly complained about his capture by police officers and his unlawful secret monitoring. Finally, the Court considered that the alleged violations of Articles 6 and 8 of the ECHR had occurred.
PROVISIONS
Article 6§1
Article 8
PRINCIPAL FACTS
The applicant, Zoran Grba, is a national of Bosnia and Herzegovina who was born in 1965 and lives in
Sarajevo. The case concerned his complaint about police entrapment.
In July 2008 an investigating judge from Pula County Court (Croatia) authorised special investigative
measures against Mr Grba – who was suspected of supplying counterfeit banknotes in Croatia –
namely tapping his telephone, covertly monitoring him using undercover agents, and conducting a
simulated purchase operation. In November 2008 the use of such measures was extended for one
month by order of the judge. On four occasions between August and November 2008 Mr Grba sold a
total of over 800 counterfeit 100 euro notes to undercover police officers. He was arrested in
November 2008 and remanded in custody on charges of currency counterfeiting. During the court
proceedings he pleaded not guilty with regard to three instances of the alleged sale of counterfeit
notes but conceded that he was responsible for having “given in to the inducement” by the police on
the last occasion in November 2008.
In May 2009 he was convicted as charged and sentenced to five years and six months’
imprisonment. At the same time the trial court ordered his expulsion from Croatia. Mr Grba
challenged the judgment before the county court arguing, in particular, that the circumstances of his
entrapment by the police had not been properly examined. The county court quashed the judgment
and remitted the case for re-examination. In April 2010 the trial court again convicted him as
charged and gave him the same sentence. Mr Grba again challenged the judgment, notably
submitting that the orders for the use of the measures in question had not been adequately
reasoned and that there had been no reason to continue with the use of simulated purchases after
the first illicit transfer. The county court upheld the first-instance judgment. Mr Grba’s request for
extraordinary review before the Supreme Court and his constitutional complaint were also
dismissed, the latter by decision of December 2011.
Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life,
the home and the correspondence), Mr Grba complained in particular of entrapment by agents
provocateurs and unlawful secret surveillance.
THE DECISION OF THE COURT
Violation of Article 8
Violation of Article 6 § 1 – as regards Mr Grba’s plea of entrapment
Just satisfaction: EUR 1,500 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 6,800 (costs and expenses)(echrcaselaw.com editing).
