(CN) - Hungary's harshest prison sentence, locking people up for life with no parole, met its reckoning Tuesday in Europe's top human rights court, where judges said a system that makes inmates wait 40 years for a shot at freedom comes far too late to pass muster.

A group of prisoners serving whole-life terms - seven men convicted of serious violent crimes, including aggravated murder, and sentenced with no possibility of parole - asked the European Court of Human Rights to find that Hungary's system leaves them with no real chance of release, effectively condemning them to die in prison.

With parole explicitly excluded in several cases, clemency remains the only path out. But that route, tied to a pardon system with review only decades into a sentence, falls short, the judges said.

They found the system fails to offer a real chance at release. "The fact that the applicants could be considered for release by way of the mandatory pardon procedure only after they had served 40 years of their life sentence was sufficient to conclude that the new Hungarian legislation did not ensure the de facto reducibility of those whole life sentences," the court said.

That cuts to a basic rule in Europe's human rights system: Even a life sentence has to leave room for review, and that possibility has to be real, not just something on paper.

The judges pointed to two core problems.

Start with timing. Making prisoners wait that long before any meaningful review kicks in goes well beyond what the court has previously accepted.

Then there's the process itself. In Hungary, that review is handled through a pardon decided by the executive rather than a clear, court-based procedure, something the judges have long said lacks proper safeguards.

Hungary insisted it had already answered those criticisms with a 2014 legal overhaul, pointing to its mandatory pardon system as proof that whole-life prisoners do get a formal path to review, even if it comes decades later.

The judges were not persuaded. They said the system still leaves prisoners with no real way out, crossing the line into inhuman punishment under European standards.

Under that framework, inmates can request a pardon at any time, but those decisions are discretionary and rarely granted, with the final call resting with the president.

That setup puts Hungary out of step with much of Europe. In many countries, life sentences come with a built-in review after 20 to 30 years, typically handled through courts or parole boards rather than political clemency.

Legal scholars see the decision as part of a broader shift.

Jrg Kinzig, a criminology professor at the University of Tbingen, said the ruling strengthens protections for prisoners and underscores the need for meaningful review mechanisms.

"In my view, the judgment is to be welcomed," he said, pointing to clearer expectations around how life sentences must be handled.

Rights groups focused on what comes next.

Nora Novoszadek, the director of the Rule of Law Programme at the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, said the ruling reinforces a principle her organization has pushed for years.

"The Hungarian Helsinki Committee has been advocating for the abolition of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole," she said, adding that the decision confirms states "cannot deprive detainees of the 'right to hope.'"

But for her, the bigger issue is what happens next. Despite repeated rulings from Europe's human rights court, she said, Hungary has yet to follow through.

"The Hungarian government has shown no political will to implement these judgments," she said, warning that without reforms, violations will continue.

Lawyers involved in the case say the impact could reach even further.

Evelyn Frank, counsel for the applicants, said the ruling goes beyond flaws in Hungary's pardon system and highlights a broader failure to carry out earlier Strasbourg judgments, now under scrutiny by the Council of Europe's Committee of Ministers, which has repeatedly flagged Hungary's noncompliance in life sentence cases.

"In my view, the Eberling and Others judgment represents significant progress," she said, adding that both the Hungarian government and the country's top court have yet to act on prior rulings. She said the decision could now force fresh review proceedings before the Kria and, where parole is excluded by law, potentially open the door to constitutional challenges against provisions of Hungary's criminal code.

The court ordered Hungary to pay each applicant 250 euros (about $295) in costs and expenses, plus any applicable taxes.

The judgment is not yet final. Hungary has three months to request a referral to the court's Grand Chamber. If no such request is made, the ruling will become binding.

The ruling comes at a moment of political change in Hungary.

Just days before the decision, voters ended Prime Minister Viktor Orban's 16-year rule in a sweeping election. His successor, Peter Magyar, has promised to repair relations with the European Union and tackle corruption.

Whether that shift will translate into broader compliance with European human rights rulings remains unclear, leaving Hungary under renewed pressure from Strasbourg and Brussels. Hungary's justice ministry did not respond to a request for comment.

Courthouse News reporter Eunseo Hong is based in the Netherlands.

Source: Courthouse News Service