From The Due Diligence Standard To The ‘Osman Test’ In Domestic Violence Cases - An Illusion Of Greater Protection?

Summary of the case: The applicant’s father was imprisoned on several counts of rape, incest and domestic violence against her. During his prison leave, he had allegedly looked for the applicant and threatened to kill her. The applicant called the police where they told her that she should contact the nearest police station if her father tries to contact her personally, stating that it made no sense to file a report regarding alleged threats since nothing had actually happened. Soon after that, she moved in a different place, and saw her father at the bus station one day. She ran into the store and called the police. Police officer talked to her father, and he said that he didn’t threaten her and that the applicant made everything up. Both applicant and her father were accompanied in their buses and no report was made. In few couple of occasions later, an applicant complained to prison, police, national court and Ministry of Justice with a request that they don’t grant her father the prison leave. She also reported police officers claiming that their actions were unlawful and that they didn’t take her seriously. The applicant complained about the inadequacy of the authorities’ response to her allegations of serious threat by her

In this case, the ECtHR stated that the authorities must take all reasonable steps…

Judge WOJTYCZEK had the dissenting opinion in this case. He emphasized that criminal procedure law has to balance conflicting interests and to protect not only the alleged victims but also other persons against unfounded accusations of committing criminal offences. Judge stated that: “Achieving the proper balance between all the conflicting interests in a specific case may be a very difficult exercise; therefore, it is necessary to leave some margin of appreciation in this respect to the domestic authorities.…