AFFAIRE WOJTAS-KALETA CONTRE LA POLOGNE

Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2013)39 [1] Wojtas-Kaleta împotriva Poloniei Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (Recherche n 20436/02, Hotărârea din 16/07/2009, definitivă la 16/10/2009) Comitetul miniștrilor, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenția pentru apărarea drepturilor omului și a libertăților fundamentale, care prevede că el supraveghează executarea hotărârilor definitive ale Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (denumite în continuare "menționate mai jos " Convenția" și "Curtea"), Având în vedere hotărârea definitivă care a fost transmisă de Curte Comitetului în cauza de mai sus și încălcarea constatată (a se vedea documentul DH-DD(2013)119E reamintind obligația de a se adresa Tribunalului, 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 pentru prevenirea unor încălcări similare; după ce a invitat guvernul statului pârât să informeze Comitetul cu privire la măsurile luate pentru a se conforma obligațiilor menționate anterior După ce a examinat bilanțul de acțiune furnizat de guvern indicând măsurile adoptate pentru a executa hotărârile, inclusiv informațiile furnizate în ceea ce privește plata satisfacției echitabile acordate de Curte (a se vedea documentul DH-DD(2013)119E S DECLARĂ quasures to comply with the judgment in the case of Wojtas-Kaleta against Poland Case description Wojtas-Kaleta, application no. 20436/02, judgment of 16/07/2009, final on 16/10/2009. Caseta referitoare la încălcarea dreptului la freedom a expresiei în that she was reprimanded by herplob, the Polish Public Television (TVP), for failing to observa the company The European Court found the reprimand not In 1999 the applicant was reprimanded for having expresed, in an interviu, her privices about lack of support for classical music by the TVP and about thefact that the quality of public televizion programs was being negatively afect as a result of orgce competition from privatate broadcasters. She also semnd an open letter addresed to the board of TVP on the same subject. She was reprimanded for failing to respect the company mais resulations, under which she was ford to respect herićs good name and the reprimand was to be kept on her records for up to a year, depending on her behaviour. The applicant lodged a claim against TVP to have the reprimand withdrawn, but to no avail as the Courts found her to have breached her obligation of loiality to her angaja. The European Court of Human Rights drew atention to the fact that the role played by jurnalists in society and their responsibility to contribute to and incuraj public debate minims their obligation of discretion, given that it is in the nature of their functions to impart information and ideas. The Court further reiterated that there is a little scop under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention for restriction on debate on interogări of public interest. Individual measures The reprimand was impuned in 1999 and, in acordance with Article 113 § 1 of the Labour Code, was to be kept on the applicant According to the information obtained by the Government the reprimand was removed from the appicants handeeeeles. The applicant did not submit a claim for damages or for the reimbursment of legal costs. In these circumstances, no further measure appears necessary. II. General Measures Încălcarea articolului 10 din Convenție în prezenta casetă a fost de rather of incidental nature and resulted from the Practice of the public televizion broadcaster and argumentations of domestic Courts. Therefore, it seems that in order to avoid similar in the viitoare publication and disemination of the Court mais judgment would be apted. In this context it should be noted that the Court.s judgment was translated into Polish and publicshed on the website of the Ministry of Justice (www.ms.gov.pl ).Judgment has been simte to all scurts of appeal and the General Prosecutor Electroluxs Office with request to disseminate it among judges and prosecutors. It has been also simte to the National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution, with request to included it in the trening program addresed to judges and prosecutors, and to the Supreme Court. În aceste circumstanțe, nu further measure appears necessary. III. Concluzii ale respondent state The Government considers that further individual measures are not necessary in the present case and that the general Measures adopted, in particular publicity and disemination of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, will be sucient to conclusion that Poland has compliment with its obligations under Article 46 paragraph 1 of the convention in respect to the breach of the article 10 of the convention. [1] Adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 7 martie 2013 în cadrul celei de-a 1164-a reuniuni a delegaților miniștrilor. [2] Informație submitted by the Polish authorities on 6 February 2013. Available only in English.

Résolution CM/ResDH(2013)39

[1]

Wojtas-Kaleta contre Pologne

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

(Requête n

o

20436/02, arrêt du 16/07/2009, définitif le 16/10/2009)

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 qu’il surveille l’exécution des arrêts définitifs de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (ci-après nommées «

la Convention

» et «

la Cour

»),

Vu le arrêt définitif qui a été transmis par la Cour au Comité dans l`affaire ci-dessus et la violation constatée (voir document

DH-DD(2013)119E

);

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 aux obligations susmentionnées

;

Ayant examiné le bilan d’action fourni par le Gouvernement indiquant les mesures adoptées afin d’exécuter les arrêts y compris les informations fournies en ce qui concerne le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée par la Cour (voir document

DH-DD(2013)119E

);

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

[2]

Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of

Wojtas-Kaleta against Poland

Case description

Wojtas-Kaleta, application no. 20436/02, judgment of 16/07/2009, final on 16/10/2009.

The case concerns the violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression in that she was reprimanded by her employer, the Polish Public Television (TVP), for failing to observe the company’s general regulation no. 14 § 2, which required her to protect her employer’s good name. The European Court found the reprimand not “necessary in a democratic society” (violation of Article 10 of the Convention).

In 1999 the applicant was reprimanded for having expressed, in an interview, her concerns about lack of support for classical music by the TVP and about the fact that the quality of public television programmes was being negatively affected as a result of fierce competition from private broadcasters. She also signed an open letter addressed to the board of TVP on the same subject. She was reprimanded for failing to respect the company’s regulations, under which she was obliged to respect her employer’s good name and the reprimand was to be kept on her record for up to a year, depending on her behaviour. The applicant lodged a claim against TVP to have the reprimand withdrawn, but to no avail as the courts found her to have breached her obligation of loyalty to her employer.

The European Court of Human Rights drew attention to the fact that the role played by journalists in society and their responsibility to contribute to and encourage public debate limits their obligation of discretion, given that it is in the nature of their functions to impart information and ideas. The Court further reiterated that there is a little scope under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention for restrictions on debate on questions of public interest.

I.

Individual measures

The reprimand was imposed in 1999 and, in accordance with Article 113 § 1 of the Labour Code, was to be kept on the applicant’s record for up to a year, depending on her behaviour.

According to the information obtained by the Government the reprimand was removed from the applicant’s employee’s files.

The applicant did not submit a claim for damages or for the reimbursement of legal costs.

In these circumstances, no further measure appears necessary.

II.

General measures

Violation of Article 10 of the Convention in the present case was rather of incidental nature and resulted from the practice of the public television broadcaster and argumentation of domestic courts. Therefore, it seems that in order to avoid similar violations in the future publication and dissemination of the Court’s judgment would be appropriated.

In this context it should be noted that the Court’s judgment was translated into Polish and published on the Internet site of the Ministry of Justice (

www.ms.gov.pl

). The judgment has been sent to all courts of appeal and the General Prosecutor’s Office with request to disseminate it among judges and prosecutors. It has been also sent to the National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution, with request to include it in the training program addressed to judges and prosecutors, and to the Supreme Court.

In these circumstances, no further measure appears necessary.

III.

Conclusions of the respondent state

The Government considers that further individual measures are not necessary in the present case and that the general measures adopted, in particular publication and dissemination of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, will be sufficient to conclude that Poland has complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention in respect to the breach of Article 10 of the Convention.

[1]

Adoptée par le Comité des

Ministres le 7 mars 2013 lors de la 1164e réunion des Délégués des Ministres.

[2]

Information submitted by the Polish authorities on 6 February 2013. Available only in English.