Kristijan Krstic and Ksenija Fej Atylon Krstic v. Serbia and Marko Pavlović v. Serbia
European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter: the Court) is 28. May 2025. brought, and 19. June 2025. published a decision in the case Krstić and Pavlović v. Serbia, Br. 35246/21 and 36032/21.
The decision isbroughtThe three-member committee.
The case refers to the request for extradition of the applicants to the United States. The applicants, among other things, complained that their extradition would be contrary to Art. 3, 8. and 13. Conventions. The court decided to take off the petition from his case listing that there were no special circumstances that would demand the examination of the same, given that the proxy has completely lost contact with the applicants. |
Circumstances Case
The applicants were charged with several other persons in the North Texas North Court that as co-sets allegedly damaged investors around the world, from their homes in China, Serbia and from other places, they sought targets around the world, including the Internet, including the entire world, including The Northern District of Texas, which will invest money in false investment platforms with binary options and to mining cryptoval.
The Ministry of Justice USA is 14. July 2020. Given the Ministry of Justice of the Republika Serbia, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the extradition agreement between the Republika Srije ("Official Gazette), which is prescribed for criminal prosecution or for the purpose of imposing the sentence said Rejected on the basis of the citizenship of the person whose extradition is requested.
The applicants were deprived of Freedom 24. July 2020, after which they were a higher court in Belgrade - a special department for organized crime has been detained.
On 13. April 2021. year, the Senior Court in Belgrade found that all legal preconditions for the extradition of applicants were completed, which the decision was confirmed 25. June of the same year by the Court of Appeals in Belgrade.
When 24. July 2021. the legal deadline for maximum duration of detention towards the applicants, the Senior Court in Belgrade has custoned them and appointed the ban on leaving residence with the obligation to periodic occurrence to the competent police stations.
The applicants submitted a request for the protection of legality to the Supreme Court of Caught Court and the constitutional complaint to the Constitutional Court demanding that their extradition is prevented. Both procedures, at the time of submission, were ongoing.
The applicants addressed the Court with a request for the issuance of temporary measure.
The Court (judge an individual) is in the period from 13. to 21. July 2021. decided to adopt temporary measure and ordered to the Republic of Serbia to not extradite applicants to 16. respectively, 19. August 2021.
The Court abolished temporary measure on 29. September 2021. years.
Complaints Applicants and Before Court Procedures
The applicants submitted the applicants to court 12. and 16. July 2021. years.
In the application, they complained about the violation of bannage of torture from Article 3. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter: the Convention), considering that in the case of extradition to the USA difficult and non-standard conditions in Texas detention and prison units, especially the then number of infected CIVID-19 virus in the state of Texas and among the prisoners, and that if they were convicted,de facto were for life in prison without the possibility of release to parole. Further complained about injury to the rightTo respect the private and family life from Article 8, because in the case of extradition faces permanent separation from the family, as their juvenile children and family members would not be able to travel to the USA to maintain contact and mutual relations. Finally, they complained about the violation of the right to an effective remedy referred to in Article 13. Convention, because in their opinion for the above, violations did not have an effective remedy.
Decision Court
The government filed the Court of observations and additional observations on applicants, but they did not answer the same. Therefore, the Government proposed to the Court that their petitions took off their items from their list, especially bearing in mind the fact that the proxy has lost contact with the applicants.
Given that the applicants did not maintain contact with their proxy and that their proxy in his submission addressed court to continue examining the representations, the Court assessed thatIt is no longer justified to continue the examination of the same.
Considering the above, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention and Protocols, the Court, in accordance with Article 37. Paragraph 1 (v) Convention,deleted the petitions from your item list.