AFFAIRE GAJEWSKI CONTRE LA POLOGNE

Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2012)199 [1] Gajewski împotriva Poloniei Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (Recherche n 27225/05, Hotărârea din 27 decembrie 2010, definitivă la 21 martie 2011) 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(2011)1010 prin care se reamintește obligația de a se pronunța în instanță, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (3) (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 obligațiilor menționate anterior 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(2011)1010 Sprecum și asigurarea faptului 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.n.n.: examinare. ACȚIUNEA REPORT [2] Informații cu privire la Measures to comply with the judgment in the case of Gajewski against Polsce [3] Case description Gajewski, aplicația nr. 27225/05, judgment of 21/12/2010, final on 21/03/2011 Caseta referitoare la lack of impartiality of the quarter that determined the applicicants claim in insolvency proceseedings, in which the applicant had been a supported a quée, on the ground that one of the judge on the bench submitted to the pent a motion remuneation of the applicant The European Court of Human Rights observad that the mărefact that a judge had already taken pre-trial decisions canot by itself be privird as justifying about his or her impartialitateity. However, in the present case the same issue, i.e. the amount of the applicant The Court further observad that, dispite the fact that the court of a doua instance had all the powers to remedy the situation, it had failed to do and the procedural defect had not been rectified. Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures 1. Details of just satisfaction niary age niary age tal 3,000 3,000 EUR aid 09/0 /2011 2. Individual measures The Court awarded the aplicant just satisfaction in respect of moraly damage. It further found that there was not any casual between the violation found and the pecuniary damage alleged. In these circumstances, no other individual measure appears necessary. II. General Measures Încălcarea articolului 6 alineatul (1) din Convenție în prezenta casetă a fost considerată ca fiind o încălcare a naturii și resulted from failure of special national scurts. Therefore, it seems that publication and disemination of the Court In this context it should be noted, that the Court as judgment was translated into Polish and publicished on the website of the Ministry of Justice (www.ms.gov.pl). The information about its publicity was simte to all scurts of appeal and the General Prosecutors Office with request to disseminate it among judges and prosecutors. It was also miros to the National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution. In these circumstances, no other general measure appears necessary. III. Concluzii of the responding state The Government considers that other 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. [1] Adoptată de Comitetul miniștrilor la 6 decembrie 2012 în cadrul celei de-a 1157-a ședințe a delegaților miniștrilor. [2] Informații submitted by the Polish authorities on 14 October 2011. [3] Doar în engleză.

Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)199

[1]

Gajewski contre Pologne

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

(Requête n

o

27225/05, arrêt du 27 décembre 2010, définitif le 21 mars 2011)

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

DH-DD(2011)1010

)

;

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 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(2011)1010

)

;

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

Gajewski against Polsce

[3]

Case description

Gajewski, application no. 27225/05, judgment of 21/12/2010, final on 21/03/2011

The case concerns the lack of impartiality of the court that determined the applicant’s claim in insolvency proceedings, in which the applicant had been appointed a trustee, on the ground that one of the judges on the bench submitted to the court a motion concerning calculation of the applicant’s remuneration (violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention).

The European Court of Human Rights observed that the mere fact that a judge had already taken pre-trial decisions cannot by itself be regarded as justifying concerns about his or her impartiality. However, in the present case the same issue, i.e. the amount of the applicant’s remuneration, was addressed by the judge in her motion and later by the court in its decision.

The Court further observed that, despite the fact that the court of second instance had all the powers to remedy the situation, it had failed to do so and the procedural defect had not been rectified.

I.

Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures

P

e

c

u

niary

da

m

age

N

o

n-

p

e

c

u

niary

da

m

age

C

o

st

s

a

n

d

e

x

p

e

ns

e

s

T

o

tal

-

3,000

E

U

R

-

3,000

EUR

P

aid

o

n

09/0

6

/2011

The Court awarded the applicant just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage. It further found that there was not any casual link between the violation found and the pecuniary damage alleged.

In these circumstances, no other individual measure appears necessary.

II.

General measures

The violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in the present cases was rather of an isolated nature and resulted from failure of specific national courts. Therefore, it seems that publication and dissemination of the Court’s judgment would be appropriated in order to avoid similar violations in the future.

In this context it should be noted, that the Court’s judgment was translated into Polish and published on the website of the Ministry of Justice (www.ms.gov.pl). The information about its publication was sent to all courts of appeal and the General Prosecutor’s Office with request to disseminate it among judges and prosecutors. It was also sent to the National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution.

In these circumstances, no other general measure appears necessary.

III.

Conclusions of the responding state

The Government considers that other 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.

[1]

Adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 6 décembre 2012 lors de la 1157e réunion des Délégués des Ministres.

[2]

Information submitted by the Polish authorities on 14 October 2011.

[3]

En anglais uniquement.