CAT/C/42/D/261/2005 Page 17 limitations on criminal prosecution), of the Criminal Code, absolute limitations on criminal prosecution become effective after expiry of twice the time period required by law for limitation of criminal prosecution. At any time after the submission of the criminal offence report, the injured party or its representative have the right to be informed of what the prosecutor has done on the report. (c) Under article 154 and article 200 of the Serbian Law on Obligations, the complainant had a right to seek compensation through civil action.25 (d) According to the Manual, civil servants do not take part in eviction procedures. Evictions are carried out by uniformed officers of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. 8.2 The State party submits that on 10 April and 17 July 2002, the policeman and Construction inspector, respectively, confirmed that “certain civilians” participated in the dispersal of settlement residents who protested against the demolition, without asserting, however, that “these civilians were police officers”. 8.3 The State party recalls that, as required by article 12 of the Convention, it conducted a prompt and impartial investigation, and carried out supplementary investigations at the HLC’s request on several occasions. The complainant’s allegation that plainclothes policemen took part in the event was not proven by the investigation and such presumption “is not in conformity with the applicable regulations of the Republic of Serbia”. 8.4 The State party regrets that the absolute statute of limitations for criminal prosecution in the present case has expired on 8 June 2006 26 and stresses that the complainant himself has partly contributed to the slowing down of the investigation. Specifically, the HLC submitted the power of attorney to represent the complainant before the Fourth Municipal Public Prosecutor of Belgrade only seven months the criminal offence report was filed. It also failed to provide the investigating authorities with proper addresses for the complainant and witnesses. 8.5 Irrespective of the absolute statute of limitations for criminal prosecution in the present case, the State party denies that it violated article 14 of the Convention, because the complainant had numerous opportunities to obtain fair compensation for the damages sustained by initiating a civil action.27 Even if criminal proceedings had been initiated, the court would have directed the complainant, upon the completion of the proceedings, to establish his claim in a civil action. That is, in criminal proceedings the court would have had to ask for expert opinions of economic and medical experts, which would have resulted in longer proceedings and in a substantial increase in costs. Moreover, under the Serbian law, criminal and civil proceedings may be conducted in parallel. The complainant was entitled to claim compensation for all types of damage (reimbursement of medical care costs, physical pain and suffering, etc.) but he failed to avail himself of such possibility. The State party reiterates that the complainant has not exhausted all available domestic remedies. 25 See also paragraph 4.9 above. See also paragraph 4.10 above. 27 See paragraph 8.1 (a) above. 26