AFFAIRE POTAPENKO CONTRE LA HONGRIE

Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2012)91 [1] Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului Potapenko împotriva Ungariei (Recherche n 323/93/05, Hotărârea din 1 februarie 2011, definitivă la 1 mai 2011) Comitetul miniștrilor, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenția pentru apărarea drepturilor omului și a libertăților fundamentale, care prevede că: 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(2012) 373E [2] care reamintește obligația statului pârât, 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 intergrom ; și măsuri generale pentru prevenirea unor încălcări similare ; invitând guvernul de la național 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(2012) 373E SlF, asigurându-se că au fost adoptate toate măsurile prevăzute la art. 46 alineatul (1); DECLAMENTUL CHILLULUI și-a îndeplinit atribuțiile în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din convenție în acest caz și DECIDE d . Action Report of 30 November 2011 App. No. 328/31/05 Potapenko, judgement of 1/02/2011 (Revised) Introductory case summary The applicant, Alexandr Potapenko, is a ucrainian national, residente in Hungary since 1986. He complained about the excesiv length of criminal proceedings brought against him in 1998 on assurance of aggravated fraud. He was aplated in 2007. He leged on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) of the convention. Further relying on Article 2 § 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement), he also complained that el passport had been confiscated for seven and a half years of the procedeedings against him. The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 6§1 and Article 2§2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention. Individual measures Just satisfaction rewarded to the applicant was paid on 2 June 2011 (moraly damage 12,500 € in sum of 3,333,625 HUF).The applicicants passport was returned to him on 11/09/2006 and he was aplated on 26/04/2007 thereby ending the domestic proceedings, prin urmare no further individual Measures are necessary in the execution requestation. II. General Measures Legisation The Government make reference to thefact that under paragraph a), which was in force at that time but has been repealed sinence then, of Secțiunea 16, subsecțiunea (1) of Act XII of 1998 on Travelling Abroad (hereinafter: On 1 July 2003, Secțiunea 308, subsecțiunea (1), paragraph (b) of Act I of 2002 on the Amendment of Act XIX of 1998 on the Criminal Code repealed Secțiunea 16, subsecțiunea (1), paragraph (a) of the Utv, prin urmare this restriction in travelling abroad was abolished. The issue of excesiv length of judicial proceedings is being examined within the context of the Timar group of cases (aplicația nr. 36186/97). Publication and disemination The decision was translated and the Hungarian version was publicished on the website of the Government (www.kormany.hu The Government simte judgement to the Office of the National Judicial Council in order to information the Courts about the content of the judgment and to take due account of the findings of the judgment in their viitor Practice. III. Concluzii of the respondent state The Government consider that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consecvences for the aplicant of the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case, and that Hungary has commis compliment with its under Article 46 Paragraph 1 of the Convention. The Government note that the possibility of further similar incalcation ceased as a result of the above-mented legislative change (aprige the freedom of movement violation). Budapest, 19 March 2012 Zoltan Tallódi Co-Agent of the Government of the Republic of Hungary [1] Adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 6 iunie 2012 în cadrul celei de a 1144-a reuniuni a Delegaților miniștrilor. [2] Numai în limba engleză

Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)91

[1]

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

Potapenko contre Hongrie

(Requête n

o

32318/05, arrêt du 1 février 2011, définitif le 1 mai 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(2012)373E

)

[2]

;

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 intergrum

; 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 susmentionnés

;

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(2012)373E

)

;

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 of 30 November 2011

Appl. No. 32318/05

Potapenko, judgement of 1/02/2011 (

Revised)

Introductory case summary

The applicant, Alexandr Potapenko, is a Ukrainian national, resident in Hungary since 1986. He complained about the excessive length of criminal proceedings brought against him in 1998 on charges of aggravated fraud. He was acquitted in 2007. He relied on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) of the Convention. Further relying on Article 2 § 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement), he also complained that his passport had been confiscated for seven and a half years of the proceedings against him. The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 6§1 and Article 2§2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention.

I.

Individual measures

Just satisfaction rewarded to the applicant was paid on 2 June 2011 (non-pecuniary damage 12,500 € in sum of 3,333,625 HUF). The applicant’s passport was returned to him on 11/09/2006 and he was acquitted on 26/04/2007, thereby ending the domestic proceedings, therefore no further individual measures are necessary in the execution process.

II.

General measures

a)

Legislation

The Government make reference to the fact that under paragraph a), which was in force at that time but has been repealed since then, of Section 16, subsection (1) of Act XII of 1998 on Travelling Abroad (hereinafter: “Utv”) a person subjected to pending criminal procedure for a crime punishable by imprisonment for up to five or more years, could not travel abroad until the final conclusion of the criminal procedure. On 1 July 2003, Section 308, subsection (1), paragraph b) of Act I of 2002 on the Amendment of Act XIX of 1998 on the Criminal Code repealed Section 16, subsection (1), paragraph a) of the Utv, therefore this restriction in travelling abroad was abolished.

The issue of excessive length of judicial proceedings is being examined within the context of the Timâr group of cases (application no. 36186/97).

b)

Publication and dissemination

The decision was translated and the Hungarian version was published on the website of the Government (

www.kormany.hu

).

The Government sent the judgement to the Office of the National Judicial Council in order to inform the courts about the content of the judgment and to take due account of the findings of the judgment in their future practice.

III.

Conclusions of the respondent state

The Government consider that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case, and that Hungary has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, Paragraph 1 of the Convention. The Government note that the possibility of further similar violations ceased as a result of the above-mentioned legislative change (as regards the freedom of movement violation).

Budapest, 19 March 2012

Zoltân Tallódi

Co-Agent of the Government of the Republic of Hungary

[1]

Adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 6 juin 2012 lors de la 1144e réunion des Délégués des Ministres.

[2]

Document en anglais uniquement