53. In the Courts view, the administrative body has not scrupulously examined the circumstances of the case, which could result in such deficiencies in its decision, that could constitute violation of rights guaranteed to the plaintiff by the Article 16 (2) of the Slovak Constitution, as well as, Article 3 of the Convention and Article 4 of the Charter, given the fact that the administrative body has not thoroughly examined systemic problems in the Hungarian asylum procedure, as well as reception conditions  for asylum seekers in Hungary.

47. From the Article 16 (2) of the Slovak Constitution, the Article 3 of the Convention and the Article 4 of the Charter follows, that their diction is essentially identical, and the Constitutional Court of the Slovak republic, in its decision making practise is of the opinion, that from the point of view of requirements put forward by these three provisions, being protection, there are no differences among the three.

50. A possible violation of the absolute prohibition of ill treatment as provided for by the Article 3 of the Convention and Article 16 (2) of the Constitution invokes the procedural obligation of the State to ensure effective official investigation of claimed ill treatment, while “efficient” comprises in particular the attributes of exhaustiveness, expeditiousness, independence and impartiality (III. ÚS 70/01, III. ÚS 86/05, III. ÚS 194/06).