AFFAIRE TĂNASE CONTRE LA REPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA

Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2012)40 [1] Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului Tănas împotriva Republicii Moldova 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 (denumită în continuare "convenția" și "Curtea") [2] Având în vedere hotărârea de mai jos, care a fost transmisă de Curte Comitetului odată ce a devenit definitiv Numele cauzei (n interogare) Hotărârea Definitivului Tanase (7/08) 27 aprilie 2010 Marea Cameră Reamintind că constatările de încălcare făcute de Curte impun, pe lângă plata satisfacției echitabile acordate în hotărâri, adoptarea de către statul membru pârât, dacă este necesar, a unor măsuri individuale care să pună capăt încălcărilor și să șteargă, pe cât posibil, consecințele acestora pentru solicitant, precum și măsuri generale care să permită prevenirea unor încălcări similare; După ce a invitat autoritățile din statul pârât să furnizeze un plan de acțiune privind măsurile propuse pentru executarea hotărârii; după ce a examinat, în conformitate cu normele Comitetului privind aplicarea articolului 46 alineatul (2) din convenție, bilanțul de acțiune furnizat de guvern (a se vedea bilanțul de acțiune, documentul DH-DD(2011) 563 [3] După ce a luat act de faptul că Statul pârât a plătit părții reclamante satisfacția echitabilă prevăzută în hotărârea pronunțată; DECLARĂ că și-a îndeplinit funcțiile în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din convenție în această cauză și DECIDE DECIDE DE (Application no. 7/08), Judgment of 27 April 2011) by the Grand Chamber Final on 27 April 2010 Introductory case summary Violetion of the freedom of the address of the people in the choice of legislature cauzad by the enacted law preventing elected MPs with multipleities from taking sets in Parliament. Violation of Article 3 of Protocol 1 I. Individual measures a) Payment Data și status: Only the compensation for costs and expenses in an amount of 8.881.83 EUR was awarded to the aplicant. Finalished: The amount of 8.881.83 EUR has been paid to the applicant on 13 July 2010. b) Reopening of the domestic proceedings/restitution in integrum Date and statuss: It does not require such measures as reopening of the proceseding. Pentru restitutio in integrum see the general measures. II. General Measures a) Publication Date and Measures The judgment has been translated into Romanian and it is available on the official web page of the Ministry of Justice. Another publicity is being pregared for the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova. Finished Available from 27 May 2010 on-going b) Dissemination Date and Measures The full translated copy of mail the judgment had been forwarded to all sended national authorities. It has been accompanied by the Governmental Agent mais comentations on modalities of execution of the individual and general measures. It was disseminated between the MPs being attached on the draft laws on amending the legal framework. The Supreme Council of Magistrates. The Supreme Court of Justice. The General Prosecutor. The Constitutional Court the Parliament c) Other impuned Measures Data and status It was required to amend the framework laws on selection of MPs with dual citizenship. The provisions of Law no.273 that banned certe categories of public servis to hold dual citizenship, included elected MPs with multiple naționalities from taking sets in Parliament, was amended by the Law no. 127 of 23 decembrie 2009 in force from 31 decembrie 2009. Respectively, the bans were lifted for all categories of publicserves. CONCLUZII The Government considers that the above-mented measures that have been implemented by the authorities lead to a conclusion that the issues found by the Court in the present case had been solved. The consecvences on the aplicantes situation have been properly remediated and he was adequately redresed in his rights. It may be apted to consider that these measures have a developent effect and they would prevent object of a similar situation(s) and viollation(s).Consequently, the Government considers that they have fulèred their obligation under Article 46§ 1 of the convention and it is aptate to strike the present case out from the lists of pandaning cases before the Committee of Ministers. Pentru acestea reasons, the Government invitates the Committee of Ministers to close their supervision process in the present case. Chisinau. 29 July 2011 Lilian APOSTOL on behalf of the Agent for the Government of the Republic of Moldova [1] Adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 8 martie 2012 cu ocazia celei de-a 1136-a reuniuni a Delegaților miniștrilor. [2] a se vedea, de asemenea, recomandările adoptate de Comitetul de Miniștri în cadrul supravegherii hotărârilor Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului, în special Recomandarea Rec.,2004)6 a Comitetului de Miniștri al statelor membre privind îmbunătățirea căilor de atac interne. [3] Document numai în limba engleză

Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)40

[1]

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

Tănase contre République de Moldova

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

»)

[2]

,

Vu l’arrêt ci-dessous, qui a été transmis par la Cour au Comité une fois qu’il est devenu définitif

;

Nom de l’affaire (n

o

requête)

Arrêt du

Définitif le

Tănase (7/08)

27 avril 2010

Grande Chambre

Rappelant que les constats de violation faits par la Cour exigent, outre le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée dans les arrêts, l’adoption par l’Etat défendeur, si nécessaire, de mesures individuelles mettant fin aux violations et effaçant autant que possible les conséquences de celles-ci pour le requérant, et de mesures générales permettant de prévenir des violations semblables ;

Ayant invité les autorités de l’Etat défendeur à fournir un plan d’action concernant les mesures proposées pour exécuter l’arrêt;

Ayant examiné, conformément aux Règles du Comité pour l’application de l’article 46, paragraphe

2, de la Convention, le bilan d’action fourni par le gouvernement (voir bilan d’action, document

DH-DD(2011)563

)

[3]

;

Ayant noté que

l’Etat défendeur a versé à la partie requérante la satisfaction équitable prévue dans l’arrêt ;

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.

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

REPORT/PLAN OF ACTIONS

IN CASE OF TANASE v. MOLDOVA

(Application no. 7/08), Judgment of 27 April 2011) by the Grand Chamber

Final on 27 April 2010

Introductory case summary

Violation of the freedom of expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of legislature caused by the enacted law preventing elected MPs with multiple nationalities from taking seats in Parliament.

Violation of Article 3 of Protocol 1

I. Individual measures

a) Payment

Date and status:

Only the compensation for costs and expenses in an amount of 8.881.83 EUR was awarded to the applicant.

Finished:

The amount of 8.881.83 EUR has been paid to the applicant on 13 July 2010.

b) Reopening of the domestic proceedings/

restitution in integrum

Date and status:

It does not require such measures as reopening of the proceedings.

For restitutio in integrum see the general measures.

-

II. General measures

a) Publication

Date and measures

The judgment has been translated into Romanian and it is available on the official web page of the Ministry of Justice.

Another publication is being prepared for the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova.

Finished

Available from 27 May 2010

On-going

b) Dissemination

Date and measures

The full translated copy of’ the judgment had been forwarded to all concerned national authorities. It has been accompanied by the Governmental Agent’s comments on modalities of execution of the individual and general measures.

It was disseminated between the MPs being attached on the draft laws on amending the legal framework.

The Supreme Council of Magistrates.

The Supreme Court of Justice.

The General Prosecutor’s Office.

The Constitutional Court

The Parliament

c) Other imposed measures

Date and status

It was required to amend the framework laws on election of MPs with dual citizenship.

Finished on 31 December 2009’

The provisions of Law no.273 that banned certain categories of public servants to hold dual citizenship, including elected MPs with multiple nationalities from taking seats in Parliament, was amended by the Law no. 127 of 23 December 2009 in force from 31 December 2009. Respectively, the bans were lifted for all categories of public servants.

CONCLUSIONS

The Government considers that the above-mentioned measures that have been implemented by the authorities lead to a conclusion that the issues found by the Court in the present case had been solved. The consequences on the applicant’s situation have been properly remediated and he was adequately redressed in his rights. It may be appropriate to consider that these measures have a deterrent effect and they would prevent occurrence of a similar situation(s) and violation(s). Consequently, the Government considers that they have fulfilled their obligation under Article 46 § 1 of the Convention and it is appropriate to strike the present case out from the lists of pending cases before the Committee of Ministers. For these reasons, the Government invites the Committee of Ministers to close their supervision process in the present case.

Chisinau. 29 July 2011

Lilian APOSTOL

on behalf of the Agent for the Government

of the Republic of Moldova

[1]

Adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 8 mars 2012 lors de la 1136e réunion des Délégués des Ministres.

[2]

voir aussi les recommandations adoptées par le Comité des Ministres dans le cadre de la supervision des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, et en particulier la Recommandation

Rec(2004)6 du Comité des Ministres aux Etats membres sur l'amélioration des recours internes.

[3]

Document en anglais uniquement