Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)301[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Baklanov against the Russian Federation
(Application No. 68443/01, judgment of 9 June 2005, final on 30 November 2005)
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 referred to as “the Convention” and “the Court”);
Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court once it had become final;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns unlawful interference with the applicant’s right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions due to the authorities’ failure to base confiscatory measures on a precise legal provision (violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 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 the Russian Federation’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 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 by the Court in its judgments, 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
- of general measures, preventing similar violations;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination of this case.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)301
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Baklanov against Russian Federation
The case concerns a violation of the applicant’s property rights due to confiscation measures taken against him without precise legal justification in 1997 (violations of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1).
A person transporting a large sum of money on the applicant’s behalf without having declared the fact was arrested by the customs authorities for smuggling. The money was confiscated on the basis of a ruling of the Supreme Court of 3/02/1978, authorising the confiscation of smuggled goods (to be placed in the case-file as an exhibit). The ruling at issue was given under Article 169-1 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1960. However, the Criminal Code of 1996, which was in force at the material time, provided no such measure. Given the ambiguity in domestic law, the European Court concluded that the applicant had been deprived of his property on a legal basis not formulated with sufficient precision to enable the applicant to foresee, to a reasonable degree, the consequences of his actions.
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
--
3 000 EUR
--
3 000 EUR
b) Individual measures
In order to erase the consequences of the violation, the relevant domestic proceedings were reopened on the initiative of the President of the Supreme Court, and the applicant was paid compensation for the confiscated property, on 13 March 2007.
Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.
II.General measures
In 2006, Chapter 15.1 was included in the Criminal Code of Russia, providing for confiscation for, inter alia, smuggling. In December 2009 that Chapter was amended by a law which specified that smuggled goods are subject to confiscation. These amendments were adopted following ratification by the Russian Federation of the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (CETS No. 090), and of the United Nations Convention against Corruption of 31 October 2003.
As a result the legal basis for confiscation of the smuggled goods is now formulated with a precision sufficient to enable the persons concerned to foresee the consequences of smuggling.
The judgment was published in Russian in the Bulletin of the European Court.
In the circumstances, no further general measure appears necessary.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that the Russian Federation has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers by tacit procedure in accordance with the decision taken at the 1128th meeting (December 2011) under item F.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy