Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)165
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Two cases against Russian Federation
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 10 July 2019
at the 1351bis meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
Application No.
Case
Judgment of
Final on
55565/00
BARTIK
21/12/2006
21/03/2007
4663/05
SOLTYSYAK
10/02/2011
20/06/2011
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 judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee in these cases and to the violations established on account of the disproportionate restriction of the applicants’ right to travel abroad on the ground of their previous access to classified information during their professional career (violations of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4);
Recalling the respondent State’s obligation, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide 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 the above-mentioned obligation;
Having noted the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see Appendix);
Considering that the question of individual measures was resolved, given that the applicants no longer appear to suffer from the aforementioned travel restrictions (see Appendix);
Recalling that the question of the general measures required in response to the shortcomings found by the Court in these judgments continues to be examined within the framework of the Berkovich and Others case and that the closure of these cases therefore in no way prejudges the Committee’s evaluation of the general measures required in the Berkovich and Others case;
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases as regards the individual measures and
DECIDES to close the examination thereof.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)...
Information about the measures to comply with the judgments
I.Case summaries
These two cases concern the disproportionate restriction of the applicants’ liberty of movement due to the authorities’ denial, in 1999 and 2005 respectively, of their right to travel abroad for private purposes on the sole ground that they had had access to classified information ("state secrets") during their professional career (violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4).
II.Payment of just satisfaction and other individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Name and application number
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
Paid on
Bartik (55565/00)
-
3,000
1,600
4,600
09/11/2007
Soltysyak (4663/05)
-
3,000
850
3,850
06/10/2011
The default interest for the delayed payment in the Bartik case was paid.
b) Other individual measures
As regards the Bartik case, it transpires from the judgment that the applicant had obtained his travel passport in 2001. As regards the Soltysyak case, it transpires from the judgment that the restriction on the applicant’s travel expired in 2008; after that date the applicant was free to apply for his travel passport.
Against this background, no further individual measures appear to be necessary.
III.General measures
The general measures required in response to the shortcomings found by the Court in these judgments continue to be examined in the Berkovich and Others case (No. 5871/07 and al).
IV.Conclusion
The government considers that no individual measure is required in these cases, apart from the payment of the just satisfaction, that the general measures will be examined in the Berkovich and Others case, and that the Russian Federation has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention in these cases.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy