FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 40990/18
Samir ASHUROV against Azerbaijan
and 7 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 31 August 2023 as a Committee composed of:
Krzysztof Wojtyczek, President,
Lətif Hüseynov,
Ivana Jelić, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants and their representatives is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning the unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings were communicated to the Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”). In application no. 58593/18 complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under Article 5 of the Convention.
THE LAW
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.
The Government acknowledged the unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings. In application no. 58593/18 they further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicant’s rights guaranteed by Article 5 of the Convention. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases.
The applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declarations several weeks before the date of this decision. In reply, the applicants submitted that they were not satisfied with the terms of the unilateral declaration. In particular, they indicated that the amount of compensation provided for in the Government’s unilateral declarations was low.
The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:
“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.
Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75‑77, ECHR 2003-VI).
The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings (see, for example, Gafgaz Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 60259/11, 15 October 2015; Huseynli and Others v. Azerbaijan, nos. 67360/11 and 2 others, 11 February 2016; Hasanov and Majidli v. Azerbaijan, nos. 9626/14 and 9717/14, 7 October 2021; and Hasanov v. Azerbaijan, [Committee], no. 59202/12, 28 April 2022). As regards the applicants’ objections to the terms of the unilateral declarations, the Court has, in the absence of further details, no reasons to consider that the compensation offered by the Government constitutes inadequate or otherwise unreasonable redress for the violation of their Convention rights (see Ryabkin and Volokitin v. Russia (dec.), nos. 52166/08 and 8526/09, §§ 49-50, 28 June 2016, and Igranov and Others v. Russia, nos. 42399/13 and 8 others, § 24, 20 March 2018, and, for a similar approach, Antovski and Others v. North Macedonia (dec.) [Committee], no. 68160/17, 8 December 2022).
Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declarations as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 (c)).
In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 in fine).
Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (see Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 21 September 2023.
Viktoriya Maradudina Krzysztof Wojtyczek
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 of the Convention
(unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Date of receipt of Government’s declaration
Date of receipt of applicant’s comments
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per applicant
(in euros)[1]
Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application
(in euros)[2]
40990/18
17/08/2018
Samir
Mahammad oglu ASHUROV
1984
Nemat
KARIMLI
Baku
11/05/2023
13/06/2023
1,000
250
58593/18
28/11/2018
Jeyhun
Jalil oglu MAMMADLI
1971
Nemat
KARIMLI
Baku
11/05/2023
13/06/2023
2,000
250
39249/19
25/06/2019
Ramin
Isamaddin oglu AHMADLI
1981
Nemat
KARIMLI
Baku
11/05/2023
13/06/2023
1,000
250
7329/20
22/01/2020
Ilgar
Mehman oglu MAHMUDOV
1965
Nemat
KARIMLI
Baku
11/05/2023
13/06/2023
1,000
250
22149/20
01/05/2020
Nazim
Murshud oglu HASANLI
1958
Nemat
KARIMLI
Baku
11/05/2023
13/06/2023
1,000
250
4219/21
26/12/2020
Tural
Masum oglu ATAKISHIYEV
1988
Nemat
KARIMLI
Baku
11/05/2023
13/06/2023
1,000
250
18328/22
23/03/2022
Rovshan
Ayaz oglu
HUSEYNOV
1975
Nemat
KARIMLI
Baku
11/05/2023
13/06/2023
1,000
250
32529/22
09/06/2022
Rashad
Rahim oglu AKHUNDOV
1990
Nemat
KARIMLI
Baku
11/05/2023
13/06/2023
1,000
250
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.