AFFAIRE IDAKIEV CONTRE LA BULGARIE

Cea de-a 1173-a reuniune precum 11-12 iunie 2013 Anexa 2 (Punctul H46-1) Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2013)116 Idakiev împotriva Bulgariei Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (Cercetarea nr. 33681/05, Hotărârea din 21/06/2011, definitivă la 21/09/2011) (adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 11 iunie 2013, cu ocazia celei de-a 1173-a ședințe a Delegaților miniștrilor) 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 încălcările constatate 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 ; Am invitat guvernul statului pârât să informeze Comitetul cu privire la măsurile luate pentru a se conforma obligației După examinarea bilanțului de acțiune furnizat de guvern care indică măsurile adoptate în vederea executării hotărârii judecătorești, inclusiv informațiile furnizate în ceea ce privește plata satisfacției echitabile acordate de Curte (a se vedea documentul DH-DD(2013) 490rev), asigurându-se că au fost adoptate toate măsurile prevăzute la art. 46 alineatul (1), DECLAMENTUL PE CARE își îndeplinește funcțiile în temeiul art. 46 alin. (2) din Convenție în această cauză și DECIDE d . Acțiune reportată Case Idakiev against Bulgaria (Applicația nr. 33681/05 Judgment of 21 June 2011 Final on 21 September 2011) (numai în engleză) Convenție de încălcare a dreptului comunitar The applicant complained, in particular, that the Supreme Administrative Court had failed to examinarea unei decisive argument of his and had failed to responsion to the applicant maimber that the appeal was time barted and the judgment had already become final (violation of Art. 6 § 1). He also complained about lack of efectiv remedy in this respect (violation of Art. 13). Individual measures (a) The compensation awarded was transferred to the applicicants account on 07/12/2011 and on 13/12/2011. The applicant, dle Idakiev, has requested a reopening of the domestic proceedings before the Supreme Administrative Court. By a judgment of 25.06.2012 the Supreme Administrative Court revoked judgment No. 1953 of 02.03.2005 of the Supreme Administrative Court and remitted the case for new considetion by another judicial panel of the Supreme Administrative Court. on 29.06.2012 the Supreme Administrative Court start start the examination of the new case No. 8161/12. on 29.11.2012 the curtea delivered an order No. 15144 in which it analized the applicant appe and held that the appeal of the other party to the proceseedings was time-barred. b) No further individual measures seem to be asignate in the case. General Measures a) Publication and dissemination of the judgment The translation of the judgment is available on the Ministry of Justice website at http://www.justice.government.bg/ The translation of the judgment has been simte to the competent national authorities (Supreme Administrative Court and Supreme Administrative Prosecution Office) with circular letter underlining the conclusion of the ECHR. No other measures seem to be necessary for execution of the judgment. Concluzii The Government of the Republic of Bulgaria believes that the measures taken have foulied the requirements that ase from the Court

1173e réunion – 11-12 juin 2013

Annexe 2

(Point H46-1)

Résolution CM/ResDH(2013)116

Idakiev contre Bulgarie

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

(Requête n

o

33681/05, arrêt du 21/06/2011, définitif le 21/09/2011)

(adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 11 juin 2013,

lors de la 1173e 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 les violations constatées

;

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, y compris les informations fournies en ce qui concerne le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée par la Cour (voir document DH-DD(2013)490rev)

;

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.

Action report

Case Idakiev against Bulgaria

(Application No. 33681/05

Judgment of 21 June 2011

Final on 21 September 2011)

(Anglais seulement)

1.

Convention violation found

The applicant complained, in particular, that the Supreme Administrative Court had failed to examine a decisive argument of his and had failed to respond to the applicant’s argument that the appeal was time

‑

barred and the judgment had already become final (violation of Art. 6 § 1). He also complained about lack of effective remedy in this respect (violation of Art.

13).

2.

Individual measures

a) The compensation awarded was transferred to the applicant’s account on 07/12/2011 and on 13/12/2011.

The applicant, Mr Idakiev, has requested a reopening of the domestic proceedings before the Supreme Administrative Court. By a judgment of 25.06.2012 the Supreme Administrative Court revoked judgment No.

1953 of 02.03.2005 of the Supreme Administrative Court and remitted the case for new consideration by another judicial panel of the Supreme Administrative Court. On 29.06.2012 the Supreme Administrative Court started the examination of the new case No. 8361/12. On 29.11.2012 the court delivered an order No. 15144 in which it examined the applicant’s arguments and held that the appeal of the other party to the proceedings was time-barred.

b) No further individual measures seem to be appropriate in the case.

3.

General measures

a) Publication and dissemination of the judgment

The translation of the judgment is available on the Ministry of Justice website at http://www.justice.government.bg/

The translation of the judgment has been sent to the competent national authorities (Supreme Administrative Court and Supreme Administrative Prosecution Office) with circular letter underlining the conclusions of the ECHR.

No other measures seem to be necessary for execution of the judgment.

4.

Conclusions

The Government of the Republic of Bulgaria believes that the measures taken have fulfilled the requirements that arise from the Court’s judgment and that as a result, similar violations in the future will be prevented. The government therefore looks forward to the Committee’s decision to close the examination of this case.