European Court of Human Rights is continuing to review the case of Stanislav Tomáš: Attorney for his family responds to the Czech Government

At the beginning of this year, the ECtHR called on the Czech Republic to express its view of the case. The court asked whether police violated Stanislav Tomáš’s right to life and whether the behavior of the police officers was motivated by racism.

The Czech state claims the police intervention was proportionate. Mr. Tomáš was arrested on 19 June 2021 by officers who kneeled on his neck and legs for several minutes.

Bystander video of the incident spread quickly on social media and sparked protests by Romani people. The police declared subsequently that his death was caused by his being intoxicated with drugs, not by the intervention itself, but those conclusions were doubted by independent experts and the family’s own legal representatives.

Attorney for the family: This is a case of injustice that has yet to be redressed

“For me personally this is a case of injustice that has yet to be redressed,” says the attorney for the victim’s family, Maroš Matiaško. “I see the failure of institutions in this case which should have protected human rights. The intervention by the police officers, in my opinion, prompts the suspicion that it was not performed professionally.”

With the support of the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) and the Forum for Human Rights (FORUM), the Tomáš family brought their case to the ECtHR. Their application claims violations of the right to life, the ban on discrimination and deficiencies in the investigation performed by the Inspector-General of the Security Forces (GIBS).

“We are hoping the ECtHR will decide in favor of the family and recognize that fundamental human rights were violated in this case,” says Đorđe Jovanović of the ERRC. The case has already made it through all of the domestic courts, all of which ruled that the police intervention was performed in accordance with the legal regulations.

The sister of the deceased then sued at the ECtHR with the aid of lawyers from the ERRC and FORUM. In her application, she claims police used more force than was necessary to restrain her brother and that the state failed to perform a proper investigation into what role her brother’s ethnicity did or did not play in that police brutality.

The Tomáš family is also claiming that they had no effective domestic remedy available with regard to the findings of the GIBS investigation. “After exhausting all domestic remedies we hope Stanislav Tomáš will get justice at the court in Strasbourg,” said Đorđe Jovanović, chair of the ERRC.

“This case is not just an example of the longstanding problem of police brutality against the Roma, but also of the absence of anything like an independent, impartial and credible investigation procedure,” Jovanović said. According to experts, the investigation process revealed serious deficiencies in the Czech system to investigate police interventions.

For instance, according to a report by the then-Deputy Public Defender of Rights, Monika Šimůnková, the police officers committed “three fatal mistakes” during their intervention: First, they waited for too long to call an ambulance and did not monitor Mr. Tomáš’s physical state while they were arresting him; second, they did not notice he had stopped showing signs of life until it was too late; and third, they did not remove the handcuffs and immediately start resuscitating him once he had collapsed. Šimůnková also ascertained that the subsequent investigation was insufficient, in particular because it failed to include eyewitness testimonies from the ambulance crew which completely contravened the claims of the police that Mr. Tomáš did not collapse until he was in the ambulance.

According to Matiaško, suspicions exist that the police officers violated their responsibility. “In such a case an independent investigation must commence. In my opinion, that did not happen. I am not a judge or a detective, so I cannot come to any hasty conclusions, nor should anybody else,” he said.

“For me personally, this is a case of fighting for justice and for more just state institutions which will investigate all cases of police brutality the same way, without a hint of discrimination,” the attorney said. Miroslav Brož of the Konexe association, which has been collaborating with the family from the very start, said he appreciated the bravery of the sister of the deceased, Simona Tomášová.

“Right at the start Simona had to choose whether to let the whole thing rest so she could have some so-called peace, or whether she would seek protection from the courts and do her best to achieve justice, despite the fact that it involves the widest possible range of difficulties and pressures. I think that she made the right choice and now, when we are closer to an ECtHR judgment (we hope), she is glad she chose not to stay silent. I remind you that Simona cares for her elderly, chronically ill mother on a daily basis,” Brož said.

Czech Government responds to the ECtHR, still claims the police intervention was proportionate

In February 2024, the senate of the ECtHR communicated the family’s application to the Government of the Czech Republic for their response. The Czech Government has responded and continues to claim that the intervention conformed to police standards.

“Now we can respond to the Czech Government’s statement. This is an important moment, because the filing of the application, which is the first step, is always limited to a certain number of pages. It is not really possible to retell the story as a whole there if it is complicated. However, our response to the Government’s statement has no such limitations, which is why it is quite important and can be of fundamental significance to the case,” Matiaško explained.

“This court cannot overturn the Czech courts’ decisions or those of other Czech bodies, but it can review whether they made a fair decision or not. Our objection is that there has been a violation of the right to life and of the ban on discrimination. The Czech Government defends itself by claiming that the police intervention was proportionate and that there was no discrimination. Only the court can judge this dispute based on the hundreds of pages submitted by both parties. It is a complicated, protracted process, which is why we have to be patient,” Matiaško said, adding that he hopes there will be a final decision from the court next year.

According to Matiaško, the ECtHR only exceptionally holds oral arguments in the cases which it decides. “Our case will be decided on the basis of written background materials. We have put together a rather extensive brief and sent it to Strasbourg. The Czech Government sent similarly extensive documentation,” the attorney described the details of the case.

What will the repercussions of the court’s decision be?

As Matiaško explained, the verdict may have far-reaching repercussions: “If the case is decided in the family’s favor, then I believe it will be necessary to open up the question of the approach taken by police officers during their interventions, e.g., whether and how to use kneeling as a method of restraint, how to monitor the state of health of the person being restrained, when to call the ambulance, etc. At the same time, the case may touch on who should investigate if there is a death during a police intervention or immediately subsequent to a police intervention. We claim that it should always be an independent body and I very much hope the court agrees.”

If the family succeeds, Brož says it could lead to positive transformations in police practice. “My wish is that the police assess which kinds of holds might be dangerous and improve the training of policemen and policewomen in that area,” he said.

These changes, according to Brož, could also touch on other aspects of interventions which could prevent similar tragedies in the future. One area on which police should concentrate is the provision of first aid.

Brož also said he considers it crucial to improve police communication and interaction with those in mental distress. “I believe Stanislav was in a state of toxic psychosis on the day he died,” he said, adding that police officers should be better prepared to negotiate professionally with people in such states.

Another problem Brož mentioned is the police failure to turn on their body cameras. “The police officers did not manage to turn on their cameras during their intervention against Stanislav Tomáš,” he said.

It is exactly such video footage that could have provided crucial evidence and increased the transparency of the police intervention. “For Romani people and for other citizens of the Czech Republic, what this means is that in a case where a significant violation of their rights transpires, if the Czech courts or authorities do not proceed as they should in their case, there is still an opportunity here to find protection and assert their rights,” Brož said.

The family of the late Mr. Tomáš perceives the ECtHR proceeding as their last hope of justice. “Stanislav’s sister and mother have been through a lot already over the years since his death, and we’ve been there with them. There have been nice situations and tense ones, we didn’t just deal with arranging his funeral and everything related to that with them, but also different crisis situations, their moving house or their health,” said Brož, who also highlighted the collaboration with Matiaško and his legal team.

“Maroš and I knew each other from previous cases already, for example, from the time we were aiding the Romani people who had been evicted from the residential hotels in Ústí nad Labem,” Brož said. He also emphasizes that without the support of the wider community it would not be possible to bring the case to the ECtHR.

“I would once again like to thank everybody from the Czech Republic and from abroad who have been involved during the entire case and who are aiding us. Without their assistance it actually could not have happened,” Brož said with gratitude.