Resolution CM/ResDH(2012)229[1]
Al Khawaja against United Kingdom
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
(Application No. 26766/05, judgment of 15 December 2011, Grand Chamber)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),
Having regard to the final judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in the above case and to the violation established (see document DH-DD(2012)771E);
Recalling that the respondent State’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide to by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:
- of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its above-mentioned obligation;
Having examined the action report provided by the government indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgment including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2012)771E);
Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted;
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination thereof.
Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Action Report
Tahery v The United Kingdom (Case Al-Khawaja and Tahery No. 26766/05)
(Application no. 22228/06; judgment final on 19 December 2011)
Information submitted by the United Kingdom Government on 8 June 2012
Case Summary
1.Case description:
-The applicant Mr Tahery alleged that his trial for wounding with intent to commit grievous bodily harm in 2005 had been unfair because the statement of one witness, who feared attending trial, was read to the jury.
-The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 6§1 read in conjunction with Article 6§3(d) of the Convention in respect of Mr Tahery.
Individual Measures
2.Just satisfaction:
-The just satisfaction award of €18,000 has been paid and evidence supplied.
3.Individual measures:
-The Government considers no further individual measures to be necessary. It is open to Mr Tahery to make an application to the Criminal Cases Review Commission for review of his case.
General Measures
4.General Measures
-The Government considers no general measures to be necessary. The judgment is confined to its specific facts. The Grand Chamber stated in their decision that “... the safeguards contained in the 1988 and 2003 Acts, supported by those contained in section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and the common law, are, in principle, strong safeguards designed to ensure fairness” (paragraph 151).
-
5.Publication:
-The judgment has been publicised in the following locations:
The British and Irish Legal Information Institute website at
The UK Human Rights Blog website at
Criminal Law and Justice Weekly publication at
Blackstone’s Criminal Practice Bulletin at
6.Dissemination:
-The judgment has also been disseminated to the English and Welsh judiciary via the judicial intranet.
7.State of execution of judgment
-The Government considers that all necessary measures have been taken and that the case should be closed.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 December 2012 at the 1157th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy