Legal issue: the constitutionality of provisions which deprive close relatives of the deceased of the right to challenge termination of proceedings in a case on administrative offence in which he was involved – whether such provisions violate the presumption of innocence and the right to judicial protection, and whether they accord to constitutional requirements as to the protection of honour, dignity and good name. 

 

Ratio decidendi: the Court refused to consider the case, saying that the Code of Administrative Offences, unlike the criminal procedural law, does not distinguish between rehabilitating and non-rehabilitating grounds for the termination of proceedings. Consequently, by virtue of the presumption of innocence the person, with regard to whom the case on administrative offence has been closed, is considered to be not guilty, that is, the State no longer questions his status as  a non-guilty person. Hereby a balance of constitutionally protected interests is achieved, and the lack of the right to challenge the decision terminating proceedings against a deceased spouse of the applicant with regard to an administrative offence may not be regarded as a violation of applicants constitutional rights.