Hungary's supreme court finds dismissal in Ahmed H case unlawful
Hungary’s supreme court has ruled that a Szeged appeals court’s dismissal of a first-instance ruling and order of a retrial in the Ahmed H case is unlawful
Hungary’s supreme court has ruled that a Szeged appeals court’s dismissal of a first-instance ruling and order of a retrial in the Ahmed H case is unlawful.
The Kúria has said that the decision, involving a Syrian national convicted under terrorism charges in connection with a mass disturbance at the Röszke border crossing in 2015, would not affect the ongoing case, describing its ruling as a procedural matter for future reference.
According to MTI, the chief public prosecutor turned to the Kúria in the summer requesting a review of the appeals court’s ruling.
Péter Polt argued that the appeals court could have used the second-instance procedure to make up for the shortcomings it identified in the case in its justification for dismissing the first-instance ruling.
The Kúria backed up the chief prosecutor’s arguments, declaring the appeals court’s dismissal of the first-instance ruling and order of a new trial unlawful.
In the primary ruling passed by the Szeged court in November 2016, Ahmed H was sentenced to serve ten years in prison for terrorist activities involving illegal border crossing as well as incitement to violence in the context of a riot.
The court in southern Hungary also ruled that at least two thirds of his term must be served before permanent expulsion from the country.
As part of his conviction, Ahmed H was sentenced for using a megaphone to direct migrants who were hurling rocks at police on the Hungarian
The prosecution appealed for a longer prison term while the defence appealed for a dismissal of the terrorism charge and a reduced sentence in respect of the other charges.