Rafael v. Hungary

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 2591/26 Ferenc RAFAEL against Hungary

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 2 July 2026 as a Committee composed of:

Stéphane Pisani , President , Juha Lavapuro, Hugh Mercer , judges ,

and Attila Teplán, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application against Hungary lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 14 January 2026,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table.

The applicant was represented by Mr D. Kiss, a lawyer practising in Budapest.

The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of criminal proceedings were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”). Complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

In the present application, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the protractedness of the prosecution.

In particular, the Court notes that the case lasted less than five and a half yours at two levels of jurisdiction, which in the circumstances cannot be considered excessive.

In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill ‑ founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

The applicant also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.

The Court has examined the application and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.

It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Declares the application inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 27 August 2026.

Attila Teplán Stéphane Pisani Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention

(excessive length of criminal proceedings)

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Start of proceedings

End of proceedings

Total length

Levels of jurisdiction

Other complaints under well-established case-law

2591/26

14/01/2026

Ferenc RAFAEL

1977

Kiss Dániel Bálint

Budapest

24/09/2020

19/03/2026

5 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 24 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings