Hungary / County Court of Kecskemét / Decision no. 5.B.154/2013/58

Country

Hungary

Title

Hungary / County Court of Kecskemét / Decision no. 5.B.154/2013/58

View full Case

Year

2015

Decision/ruling/judgment date

Monday, March 02, 2015

Incident(s) concerned/related

Violence

Related Bias motivation

Nationality

Groups affected

Refugees & asylum seekers

Court/Body type

National Court

Court/Body

County Court of Kecskemét (Kecskeméti Törvényszék)

Key facts of the case

The defendant was a guard at the Alien-Police Detention Facility of Bács-Kiskun County. Thirty-eight asylum seekers were detained in the facility as of 7 October 2011. In the morning, the detained people started a riot, and rejected the orders of the guards, attempted to escape, and damaged furniture in their cells. Four detainees (Sudanese and Libian nationals) were locked into solitary cells after the riot was over. During that night, the defendant (the guard) beat the four detainees, forced one of them to eat after he decided to go on hunger strike, and kicked another in the stomach. The guard even yelled at one of the victims 'Damn dreadlocks'.

Main reasoning/argumentation

The main question was whether the guard's behaviour was an act of revenge or hate, and whether the yelling proved a discriminatory, racist or xenophobic motive of the perpetrator.

Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?

Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case

While it was obvious that the perpetrator committed the crime of assault and battery, and the crime of mistreatment in official proceedings, the court had to examine whether the term 'damn dreadlocks' constitutes a racist/xenophobic motive.

Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case

The court decided the defendant used the term 'damn dreadlocks' only to refer to the hairstyle of the victim and not to discriminate against him based on his race. The court emphasised that, based on the testimony of several witnesses, the victim was often called 'dreadlocks' by his cellmates, therefore, the guard's action was due to the grudge he felt because of the morning's incident, and did not constitute a hate crime.

Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details

Excerpt from the reasoning of the decision:
'A gúnyolódásból nem lehet arra következtetni, hogy a vádlott a sértett közösséghez tartozását akarta kifejezni, illetve, hogy valamely közösséghez tartozása miatt bántalmazta.'

'The mocking was not due to the victim's discrimination based on his race, therefore, the defendant did not assault him because of his race.'

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.