The European Court ruled: Police intervention in the east of Slovakia violated rights!

During a police intervention in the village of Milhošť in the district of Košice-okolie in July 2019, the fundamental rights of two complainants were violated. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decided on this on March 26 in the case of Katarína Kuruová and Helena Horváthová against the Slovak Republic. The court found a violation of the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment and at the same time pointed out shortcomings in the investigation of this treatment. As TASR was informed by the spokesperson of the public defender of rights (VOP) Branislav Gigac, the court also ordered the state to pay a total of 28,560 euros.

  • The European Court of Human Rights ruled on the violation of the rights of two sisters.
  • The court found inhumane degrading treatment and insufficient investigation of police violence.
  • The Slovak state must pay the complainants a total of 28,560 euros, including costs.
  • The public defender of rights revealed violations of the rights of other persons, including minors.
  • The decisions of the ECtHR reveal the systemic problems of the police and burden the state budget.

The case concerns two sisters who after the intervention, the police detained her in front of the family house and then took her to the police station. According to the complaint, they were subjected to physical violence, verbal insults and inappropriate treatment during their detention and stay at the police station. Of the total amount, EUR 6,560 represents compensation for the costs and expenses of the proceedings. “I see the decision as an important impulse to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms and to improve practice in the use of coercive means, as well as in the investigation of police violence in Slovakia,” stated VOP Róbert Dobrovodský.

In 2019, the European Roma Rights Center filed an initiative to investigate the police intervention. It concerned the procedure of members of the Regional Department of the Police Force in Čani and the emergency motorized unit of the Police Force in Košice, who during the intervention used coercive means against several residents, including a minor. Although the Office of the Public Defender of Rights did not register an individual initiative directly from the complainants, both were among the persons affected by the intervention.

“The decision of the European Court of Human Rights pconfirms the seriousness of the findings, which we have drawn attention to in this case in the past. At the same time, it points to the need for systemic changes that will ensure that fundamental rights are not violated during police interventions,” said VOP. At the same time, the VOP also found a violation of fundamental rights in relation to other persons affected by the same incident, including a person who was a minor at the time of the intervention. It also identified serious deficiencies in recording the use of coercive means.

The police intervention in Milhost is also the subject of further proceedings before the ECtHR, which concerns the treatment of two men from the same family during their detention and transfer to the police station after the intervention of 23 July 2019. VOP requested to enter as a third party in this proceeding, the court allowed its intervention in September 2025. In its submission, it pointed out that this intervention, according to his findings, is not an isolated incident, but points to wider systemic problems in the use of coercive means by the police.

According to the General Terms and Conditions, similar court decisions are not unique and point to the wider impact of violations of fundamental rights on public finances, since compensations are paid from the state budget. For example, in December 2024, the ECtHR awarded Branislav Adamč 20,000 euros for non-pecuniary damage and 3,500 euros for legal costs in connection with unreasonable personal searches in prison. In September 2025, in the case of Tatič against the Slovak Republic, he awarded the complainant 15,000 euros for non-pecuniary damage and 1,000 euros for the costs of the proceedings.

source