Facts as presented by the author
The author is a professional lawyer. In May 1995 he moved to Luxembourg with his
family. He managed a trust company listed in the Luxembourg commercial register. On 16
April 1996, an arrest warrant was issued against him in response to the filing of several
complaints concerning breach of trust, fraud and attempted fraud. 1 On 29 October 1996, the
investigating judge referred the case to the Criminal Court.
Luxembourg (communication No. 3090/2017)
On 24 April 1997, the author was summoned in Luxembourg pursuant to an arrest
warrant issued on 16 April 1996. The Luxembourg police conducted a search of his home
and office, pursuant to an order issued on 23 April 1997 by the Luxembourg investigating
judge, with a view to seizing all the files of his Luxembourg trust company as well as
documents relating to alleged French criminal charges. The author was placed in pretrial
detention for the following offences: fraud, forgery, making use of forged documents and
breaching the Act of 5 April 1993 on the financial sector.
The author alleges that on 24 April 1997 he was placed in incommunicado detention
for a month in an individual cell, without the right to exit, for alleged offences perpetrated
in the performance of his duties as director of the trust company. On 27 May 1997, when he
succeeded in contacting his lawyer, he submitted an application for release, which was
rejected on 29 May 1997 by the Luxembourg District Court Chamber on the grounds that
the charges were partly liable to a criminal penalty and that there was a risk of flight and
concealment of the evidence during the investigation of the case. On 6 June 1997, the
Luxembourg Court of Appeal dismissed the author’s appeal.
On 12 June 1997, the Luxembourg District Court dismissed the author’s application
for release on the grounds that there was serious evidence of guilt, a legally presumed risk
of flight and a risk of concealment of evidence, inasmuch as the investigation had not been
completed. On 24 June 1997, the Luxembourg Court of Appeal dismissed the author’s
On 20 June 1997, the Lille public prosecutor submitted a request to the International
Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) for provisional arrest of the author pending
extradition, citing the urgency of the case. On 30 June 1997, a Luxembourg investigating
judge issued a provisional arrest warrant against the author 2 with a view to his extradition to
On 1 July 1997, the Luxembourg District Court dismissed a renewed application
from the author for release.

On 4 November 1997, the author was handed over to the French authorities.

On 27 March 2002, the author sought compensation for his arbitrary detention,
invoking the Act of 30 December 1981 on compensation for unjustified pretrial detention. 3
On 22 November 2002, a commission composed of the “president of a division” of the
Luxembourg Court of Appeal, a Court lawyer and an executive advisor declared the
author’s application inadmissible, since he had not benefited from an order or judgment of
discharge, he had not been acquitted by a final judicial ruling, and he had not been held in
detention after the expiry of the time limit for prosecution. The author refrained from filing
an appeal against this ruling within the three-month time limit on the ground that, in his
view, it would serve no purpose.
On 7 January 2013, the Minister of Justice dismissed the application for
compensation, pursuant to the Act of 30 December 1981, for unjustified pretrial detention.




In a final judgment handed down on 19 May 1995, the author was convicted of illegally engaging in
activities as a real-estate agent.
The warrant specifies that the author was detained at Schrassig Prison, and charged with offences
defined under Luxembourg law as breach of trust, fraud, attempted fraud and issuance of an
uncovered cheque.
The author notes that article 2 of the Act actually specifies only three cases in which compensation
may be granted: acquittal, discharge and statutory limitation.

Select target paragraph3