AFFAIRE SAN LEONARD BAND CLUB CONTRE MALTE

Cea de-a 1176-a ședință precum 10 iulie 2013 Anexa 15 (Punctul H46-1) Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2013)146 San Leonard Band Club împotriva Maltei Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (Cercetarea nr. 77562/01, Hotărârea din 29 iulie 2004, definitivă la 29 octombrie 2004) (adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 10 iulie 2013, cu ocazia celei de-a 1176-a ședințe a Delegaților de Miniștri) Comitetul miniștrilor, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenția pentru apărarea drepturilor omului și a libertăților fundamentale, care prevede ca Comitetul să supravegheze executarea hotărârilor definitive ale Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (denumite în continuare "convenția" și "Curtea"), Având în vedere hotărârea definitivă care a fost transmisă de Curte Comitetului în cauza de mai sus și încălcarea constatată; reamintind obligația statului pârât în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (1) (1) din Convenție, să se conformeze hotărârilor definitive în litigiile la care este parte și că această obligație implică, pe lângă plata satisfacției echitabile acordate de Curte, adoptarea de către autoritățile din statul membru în cauză, dacă este necesar de măsuri individuale pentru a pune capăt încălcărilor constatate și pentru a elimina consecințele acestora, în măsura posibilului de către Restitutio in integrum de măsuri generale de prevenire a unor încălcări similare care au invitat guvernul din statul pârât să informeze Comitetul cu privire la măsurile luate pentru a se conforma obligației respective După examinarea bilanțului de acțiune furnizat de guvern care indică măsurile adoptate în vederea executării hotărârii și notarea faptului că a fost acordată o satisfacție echitabilă de către Curte în prezenta cauză (a se vedea documentul DH-DD(2013)651 SÕ asigurându-se că au fost adoptate toate măsurile prevăzute la art. 46 alineatul (1), DECLARĂ pe care își îndeplinește funcțiile în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenția în acest caz și DECIDE d'en . Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Acțiune Report San Leonard Band Club against Malta (Application No. 77562/01; judgment final on 29 October 2004) (în limba engleză numai Case summary Case description: Caseta referitoare la încălcarea dreptului de a face apel la justiție. In 1996, in the context of a micion for retrial of civil proceduredings, the same judges of the Court of Appeal were called upon to ascertain whether their previous judgment was based on a mistration of the law (violation of articles of article) 1. Thus, the same judges were called upon to decide whether or not they themselves had committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision (§§63-64 of the judgment). The European Court found that these circumstances were sucient to hold that the applicant Individual measures Satisfacție echitabilă: The applicant company awyers lawyers did not submit any claim for just satisfaction or for reimbursment of costs and expenses, although invitad to do so. Accordingly, the Court decided not to award any sum in these respects. Individual measures: The European Court informated that in cases of violation of the right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal, the most aposate measure in principle is reopening the case before an independent and impartial tribunal (§70). In a decision of 18 May 2005, the Constitutional Court ordered that the appicanted minimion for retrial of 21 May 1994 should be heard afresh, and that the Court of Appeal should not be commit of the same judges who had presided over the previous procedeedings. The domestic procedeedings were subsequently reopened and a new panel of judges, different from those having sat in the original first-invention or apeal proceseedings, presided over the new proceseedings. on 27 February 2009 the procedeedings were completed. The authorities are of the ponson that the judgment does not require the adoption of any further individual Measures. General Measures Other general measures: The European Court Publication and disemination: The judgment has been publicished and diseminated to the Court of Appeal. All judgments of the European Court against Malta are automatically simte out to competent authorities and are publicly available via the website of the Ministry for Home Affairs and National Security which provides a direct link to the European Courts website. Judgment features in the publicity in the names maita at the European Court of Human Rights 1987

1176e réunion – 10 juillet 2013

Annexe 15

(Point H46-1)

Résolution CM/ResDH(2013)146

San Leonard Band Club contre Malte

Exécution de l’arrêt de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme

(Requête n

o

77562/01, arrêt du 29 juillet 2004, définitif le 29 octobre 2004)

(adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 10 juillet 2013,

lors de la 1176e réunion des Délégués des Ministres)

Le Comité des Ministres, en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales, qui prévoit que le Comité surveille l’exécution des arrêts définitifs de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (ci-après nommées «

la Convention

» et «

la Cour

»),

Vu l’arrêt définitif qui a été transmis par la Cour au Comité dans l’affaire ci-dessus et la violation constatée ;

Rappelant l’obligation de l’Etat défendeur, en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe

1, de la Convention, de se conformer aux arrêts définitifs dans les litiges auxquels il est partie et que cette obligation implique, outre le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée par la Cour, l’adoption par les autorités de l’Etat défendeur, si nécessaire

:

-

de mesures individuelles pour mettre fin aux violations constatées et en effacer les conséquences, dans la mesure du possible par

restitutio in integrum

;

et

-

de mesures générales permettant de prévenir des violations semblables

;

Ayant invité le gouvernement de l’Etat défendeur à informer le Comité des mesures prises pour se conformer à l’obligation susmentionnée

;

Ayant examiné le bilan d’action fourni par le gouvernement indiquant les mesures adoptées afin d’exécuter l’arrêt et notant qu’aucune satisfaction équitable n’a été octroyée par la Cour dans la présente affaire (voir document

DH-DD(2013)651

)

;

S’étant assuré que toutes les mesures requises par l’article 46, paragraphe 1, ont été adoptées,

DECLARE qu’il a rempli ses fonctions en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention dans cette affaire et

DECIDE d’en clore l’examen.

Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Action Report San Leonard Band Club against Malta

(Application No. 77562/01; judgment final on 29 October 2004)

(anglais seulement)

Case summary

1.

Case description:

The case concerns the violation of the applicant’s right to a fair hearing before an impartial tribunal. In 1996, in the context of a petition for retrial of civil proceedings, the same judges of the Court of Appeal were called upon to ascertain whether their previous judgment was based on a misinterpretation of the law (violation of Article

6

§

1). Thus, the same judges were called upon to decide whether or not they themselves had committed an error of legal interpretation or application in their previous decision (§§63-64 of the judgment).

The European Court found that these circumstances were sufficient to hold that the applicant’s fears as to the lack of impartiality of the Court of Appeal were objectively justified (§65).

Individual measures

2.

Just satisfaction:

The applicant company’s lawyers did not submit any claim for just satisfaction or for reimbursement of costs and expenses, although invited to do so. Accordingly, the Court decided not to award any sum in these respects.

3.

Individual measures:

The European Court indicated that in cases of violation of the right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal, the most appropriate measure in principle is reopening the case before an independent and impartial tribunal (§70).

In a decision of 18 May 2005, the Constitutional Court ordered that the applicant’s petition for retrial of 21

May

1994 should be heard afresh, and that the Court of Appeal should not be composed of the same judges who had presided over the previous proceedings. The domestic proceedings were subsequently reopened and a new panel of judges, different from those having sat in the original first-instance or appeal proceedings, presided over the new proceedings. On 27 February 2009 the proceedings were completed.

The authorities are of the opinion that the judgment does not require the adoption of any further individual measures.

General measures

4.

Other general measures:

The European Court’s judgment has resulted in a change of judicial practice: in the event of a request for retrial the judges involved have, to date, always abstained from presiding over the retrial proceedings.

5.

Publication and dissemination:

The judgment has been published and disseminated to the Court of Appeal. All judgments of the European Court against Malta are automatically sent out to competent authorities and are publicly available via the website of the Ministry for Home Affairs and National Security which provides a direct link to the European Court’s website.

Judgment features in the publication in the names ‘Malta at the European Court of Human Rights 1987 – 2012’, Sammut, Cuignet & Borg, 2012.

State of execution of judgment:

The government considers that all necessary measures have been taken to execute the judgment and that the case should be closed.