Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)82[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Arnarsson against Iceland
(Application No. 44671/98, judgment of 15 July 2003, final on 15 October 2003)
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 judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the right to a fair hearing, in that the Supreme Court based the final conviction given on appeal solely on the oral evidence given before the lower court (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with Iceland's obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;
Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee's Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgment, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of
- individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- general measures preventing, similar violations;
Having examined the measures taken by the respondent state to that effect, the details of which appear in the Appendix,
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination of the case.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)82
Information on the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Arnarsson against Iceland
Introductory case summary
The case concerns the violation of the applicant's right to a fair hearing by a tribunal, concerning a criminal matter (violation of Article 6§1). In May 1997, the applicant was involved in a fight following which a person died, and was charged with kicking the victim in the head causing a cerebral haemorrhage which resulted in death. After having heard the witnesses and the applicant, the District Court acquitted him. Following an appeal by the prosecution, the Supreme Court sentenced the applicant in May 1998 to two years and three months' imprisonment, basing its decision on a reassessment of the oral evidence given before the lower court without hearing evidence from the applicatn or the other witnesses.
The European Court found that the issues to be determined by the Supreme Court when convicting and sentencing the applicant could not have been examined properly without a direct assessment of the evidence given by the applicant in person and by certain witnesses.
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
8 000 EUR
13 500 EUR
21 500 EUR
Paid on 05/09/2003
b) Individual measures
The applicant's counsel has indicated that the applicant does not wish to apply for re-opening.
II.General measures
According to the Icelandic authorities, the origin of the violation found by the Court did not stem from the wording of the law but lay in the circumstances of the case. Therefore, the judgment of the European Court has been translated, disseminated and published on the website of the Ministry of Justice so that the courts can take it into account in the future.
In fact, even though the jurisprudence of the European Court has no binding direct effect in Icelandic Law (Law No. 62 of 1994), the Supreme Court takes it regularly into account. Thus, since the facts in this case, the Supreme Court has used the possibility to receive oral evidence and to invalidate the lower court's judgments in several cases. According to the Icelandic authorities, the Supreme Court will continue to follow this practice in accordance with the European Court's case-law.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that Iceland has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 June 2007 at the 997th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy