Plângerea CEDO nr. 2712/02: Expunerea faptelor şi întrebări puse părţilor (în limba engleză)
Proceduri juridice externe iniţiate de Agache - Plângerea 2712/02 de la CEDO

Plângerea CEDO nr. 2712/02: Expunerea faptelor şi întrebări puse părţilor (în limba engleză - traducere automată google)

siglă cedo

December 14, 2007


(Application No. 2712/02)

Presented by Ileana and other Agache Against Romania

Filed on September 13, 2001



The applicants, Ms. Ileana Agache, Mr.  Liviu Agache, Ms. Ileana Depner, Mr. Andrei Ovidiu-Agache, Mr.  Agache and Mr. Ioan  Aurel-Dionisie Agache, are Romanian nationals, born respectively in 1948, 1979, 1977, 1973, 1972, 1970 and residing in Codlea all, in Romania, with the exception of the third applicant who resides in Freising, Germany.

A.  The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case as they were incurred by the claimants, can be summarized as follows.  The Dec. 22, 1989, when anticommunist demonstrations that took place in Târgu-Secuiesc, Aurel Agache, the officer miliţia, was killed.

In 1990 a criminal investigation was opened by the police regarding the circumstances of the death of Aurel Agache.  A number of witnesses took place during the years 1991 and 1992 respectively.  On April 7, 1992, the last he brought to the attention of the prosecutor general situation of the investigation into the death of his father and asked for the scenery of the case.  He argued that a strong influence manifested itself on the investigation of the file from the local members of a political party.  According to him, having released after 30 days in detention defendants Hejja Dezideriu, Paizs Octavian  and Filip Orban Daniela Kamilla , thereby promoting illegal leak of the latest in Hungary, also demonstrate the fault of the investigation.

On April 24, 1992, the prosecutor general told him that the investigation was ongoing and that he could ask the scenery of the case in order to ensure the normal conduct of the trial after the court action.

On June 28, 1992, the last applicant interested meadows with prosecutors in the District Court of Covasna stage of the proceedings.

On July 14, 1992, the prosecutor with the District Court of Covasna told him that despite the large number of people heard, the identity of the culprits could not be revealed.  The prosecutor told him that the investigation was still pending, and asked him if it was able to provide new clues about the identity of the perpetrators.

On November 17, 1992, the Department of Public Prosecutions told the first applicant, in response to its requests regarding the progress of the investigation, on the one hand he was encountering difficulties in the identification and the testimony of witnesses and " secondly that certain witnesses already heard had changed their statements.

In a letter dated October 14, 1997, the prosecutor at the Court of Appeal in Brasov asked the prosecutor with the District Court of Covasna urgenter of the criminal investigation concerning the defendants Hejja Dezideriu, Paizs Octavian , and Filip Orban Daniela Kamilla   In an indictment of 15 December 1997, the prosecutor with the District Court of Covasna sent for trial before the District Court of Covasna, Filip Orban Daniela Kamilla , Paizs Octavian , Hejja Dezideriu, Reiner Anton, and Konrad Ioan, participants in the events of December 1989, for violence involving the death without intention to (lovituri cauzatoare of moarte) offence under section 183 of the penal code.  The prosecution founded his indictment on the statements of several witnesses, as well as a report on the forensic evidence on the causes of death of Aurel Agache.  The facts, as agreed upon by the prosecution, can be summarised as follows.  After learning the news of the escape of husband Ceauşescu, several residents of the city of Târgu-Secuiesc went to the city centre.  They destroyed the symbols of power and broke several windows of bookstores.  At the headquarters of the miliþia, having besieged the entrance and thrown through the window of documents and pieces of furniture, the crowd agressa several officers of the miliţia, Aurel Agache.  He and his colleagues left the building where demonstrators set fire.  Aurel Agache was then struck by two or three people who could not be identified, but escaped and later assisted by the OC witnesses and KL He ran towards the city centre, but was again apprehended by the crowd and beaten.  He managed to seek refuge in a pharmacy, but for a short period.  In view of the violence, the witness KM, a doctor called an ambulance.  Upon his arrival, Aurel Agache was mounted, but it was prevented from starting by the mob rage.  According to statements from witnesses, charged Hejja Dezideriu, Paizs Octavian  and the Reiner Anton down from the ambulance and beat him.  The accused Filip Orban Daniela Kamilla  gave several shots in the chest and on her head with the heel of his boots and the Konrad Ioan struck with feet in the neck and chest.  Aurel Agache died on the spot.  The indictment stated that the first applicant, the wife of Aurel Agache had not established civil party and she wanted only the punishment of the guilty.  On February 9, 1998 by an interlocutory order, the District Court of Covasna filed in the case five adult children Aurel Agache as civil parties.  On the same day, the lawyer for the civil parties 500 million lei asked for compensation for the victim's wife and 100 million lei for each of his five children.  The court postponed the case at the request of Paizs Octavian  for preparing his defence.  Counsel for the claimants are opposed by the adjournment.  On February 25, 1998, the court postponed the case on the grounds that Filip Orban Daniela Kamilla  was neither present nor represented by a lawyer at the hearing.  On March 25, 1998, the court heard Reiner Anton, which denied its involvement in the attack on Aurel Agache.  The court adjourned the case to April 27, 1998 because of the lack of Filip Orban Daniela Kamilla  and Konrad Ioan  As a registered application to the Supreme Court of Justice on April 6, 1998, the complainants asked the scenery of the case.  They invoked several supporting reasons.  They pointed out that it was mainly unacceptable that the preliminary investigation of the case lasted almost eight years, there was a strong involvement at the local level of a political party, as well as the existence of threats' aggression against them and the lawyer who represented the courts.  They also maintained that the prosecutor who was investigating the case was the husband of the judge responsible for deciding the merits.  In a preliminary decision made without the right motivation June 3, 1998, the Supreme Court of Justice welcomed the request and sent the case back to District Court in Bucharest.  The Court set aside all procedural steps before the District Court of Covasna.  The September 10, November 5 and December 3, 1998, the Bucharest District Court postponed the case finding is the absence of the accused or that of the representatives of the complainants.  On 15 February 1999 the District Court of Bucharest Paizs Octavian  Hejja Dezideriu and condemned to prison sentences of four years, Filip Orban Daniela Kamilla  to a prison sentence of seven years and Reiner Anton to three years in prison sentence for abuse resulting in death without intent give (lovituri cauzatoare of moarte).  After noting the lack of evidence against the accused Konrad Ioan, the court acquitted on the grounds that he did not commit the allegations.  The court based its decision on evidence that is already on file, on the statements of the two accused, Reiner Anton and Paizs Octavian , and on the testimony of three witnesses back to education.  Two of the complainants also filed as civil parties.  The court considered the statements of other witnesses who filed during the investigation as unnecessary and renounced their hearing.  It attracted then that the facts described in the indictment prosecutors were fully proved.  The four accused were convicted jointly obliged to pay 10 million lei to the wife of Aurel Agache for physical damage and 50 million lei for each civil party in moral damages.  Paizs Octavian , Hejja Dezideriu, Reiner Anton, Filip Orban Daniela Kamilla  and the prosecution filed an appeal.  The defendants requested their acquittal.  The prosecution asked the condemnation of Konrad Ioan and that the stay of execution of sentence of Reiner Anton is removed.  In a decision dated November 18, 1999, the Court of Appeal of Bucharest, without the hearing of witnesses offered by the defendants during hearings, welcomed the appeal by the prosecution.  The court rejected the acquittal of Konrad Ioan and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three years and the payment of compensation in material and moral solidarity with the other defendants.  The stay of execution of sentence of imprisonment of Reiner Anton was rejected.  The defendants filed an appeal and asked for their acquittal.  The prosecution also formed an appeal and asked for the change of the legal restraints of the facts and Konrad Ioan Reiner Anton, violence causing death without intent to give (lovituri cauzatoare moarte of) murder.  Claimants have argued at hearings before the Supreme Court of Justice, the appeal lodged by the public prosecutor.  In a decision dated March 26, 2001, the Supreme Court of Justice dismissed the action as unfounded, after confirming the facts of the case taken by other courts.


Citing Article 6 of the Convention, the applicants complained that the investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of their father was not conducting an independent and impartial manner.  They argue that including the length of the proceedings has been eleven years and three months, due notably to delay the flight abroad of some defendants.  In addition, the court did not proceed with the hearing of witnesses or to charge or discharge, and the hearings that were held were conducted in a formal way.  They also argue that there has been political pressure on the prosecutor who has Fabian Karoly instrumented the case so that it delayed the decision.  In addition, the defendants should have been convicted of murder, given the seriousness of the acts of which they were accused.


1. Article 2 shall be applied the ratione tempore procedure to criminal investigation concerning the circumstances surrounding the death of Aurel Agache?

2. If so, given the procedural protections of the right to life (see paragraph 104 of the judgement Salman v. Turkey [GC], No. 21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII), the survey in this case conducted by domestic authorities she meets the requirements of Article 2 of the Convention?

The Government is asked to provide documents and information:

-- A copy of the file;

-- All interlocutory decisions before domestic courts;

-- A copy of the report of forensic No. 265 / A of 28 December 1989;

-- If the jail that the defendants were inflicted by the judgement of the Supreme Court of Justice of 26 March 2001 were executed.


Există frunze care nu cad, oricât de puternic ar fi vântul. Există clipe, oameni şi fapte care nu se uită, chiar dacă uitarea este o lege a firii.

Acest site îşi propune să prezinte opiniei publice informaţii despre uciderea colonelului post-mortem Agache Aurel, procesul care s-a desfăşurat în perioada cuprinsă între 09 februarie 1998 şi 26 martie 2001, procesele de revizuire dintre anii 2007-2013, precum şi aspectele ce au apărut în ultimii 24 ani, atât în ceea ce priveşte latura politică, juridică, a executării sentinţei atât pe latura penală cât şi civilă pe teritoriul României şi Republicii Ungaria, cât şi procedurile juridice desfăşurate la CEDO şi nu în cele din urmă în ceea ce priveşte manipularea practicată de către grupul de interese care îi reprezintă pe criminali.

Cazul Uciderii Colonelului Post Mortem Agache Aurel