RESOLUTION DH (98) 4
HUMAN RIGHTS
APPLICATION No. 18143/91
A.G. AGAINST FRANCE
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 18 February 1998
at the 618th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the report drawn up on 11 May 1994, by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 15 March 1991 by a Libyan national, Mr A.G., against France (Application No. 18143/91);
Whereas on 29 June 1994 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1, of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 of the Convention;
Whereas in his application, declared admissible by the Commission on 31 March 1993, the applicant complained of the interception and recording of his telephone conversations by criminal investigation police officers and of the unfairness of the criminal proceedings brought against him due to the use of this telephone tapping;
Whereas in its report the Commission expressed unanimously the opinion that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention and that there had been no violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
Whereas, at the 519th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1, of the Convention, and agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, by a decision adopted on 20 October 1994, that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention and that there had been no violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals made by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards just satisfaction to be awarded to the applicant, proposals supplemented by a letter of the President of the Commission dated on 3 March 1995;
Whereas, at the 605th meeting of the Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the Commission’s proposals, held, by a decision adopted on 29 October 1997, in accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that the Government of France was to pay the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months, 7 500 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage and 15 000 French francs in respect of costs and expenses, namely a total sum of 22 500 French francs and that interest should be payable on any unpaid sum, calculated on the basis of each full elapsed month of delay at the statutory rate applicable on the date of this decision, it being understood that the interest would accrue from the expiry of the time-limit until full payment was placed at the disposal of the applicant;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government of France to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 20 October 1994 and 29 October 1997, having regard to France’s obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4, of the Convention to abide by them;
Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of France accordingly recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation found in this case, through the Act of 10 July 1991 concerning the secrecy of correspondence transmitted through telecommunications which has conferred a legal basis on telephone-tapping (see Resolution DH (92) 40 adopted in the case of Huvig against France), and indicated that the Commission’s report as well as the Committee of Ministers’ decisions had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that the Government of France paid the applicant, within the time-limit set, the total sum of 22 500 French francs as just satisfaction,
Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 32 of the Convention in this case;
Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy