Resolution CM/ResDH(2012)190[1]
Block against Hungary
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
(Application No. 56282/09, judgment of 25/01/2011, final on 25/04/2011)
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 judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in the above case and to the violations established (see document DH-DD(2012)1057E);
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)1057E);
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.
Final Action Report of 31 October 2012, Appl. No. 56282/09
Block, judgment of 25/01/2011 (Revised)
Introductory case summary
Violation of the applicant’s right to a fair trial, his right to be informed in detail of the nature and cause of the accusation against him and his right to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence (Article 6 § 1 in conjunction with Article 6 § 3 (a) + (b)). The Budapest Appeal Court (in October 2007) and the Supreme Court (in April 2009) both re characterised the offence for which the applicant had been found guilty without giving him the possibility to readjust his defence."
I. Individual measures
Just satisfaction rewarded to the applicant was paid on 7 July 2011 (non-pecuniary damage 5000 €, costs and expenses 600 €, 1524843 HUF).
Where an individual, as in the instant case, has been convicted by a court in proceedings which did not meet the Convention requirements of fairness, a retrial, a reopening or a review of the case, if requested, represents in principle an appropriate way of redressing the violation (see § 29 of the Court’s judgment)".
By the judgment of Budapest Regional Court of Appeal of 10 October 2007 (No. Bf. 62/2007/21.) the applicant was convicted of forgery of public documents and sentenced to a fine. The Supreme Court upheld this judgment on 30 April 2009 (No. Bfv.II.835/2008/12.)
The Government sent the judgment of the ECHR to the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office in order to initiate the reopening of the criminal proceedings under Section 416 of the Code on Criminal Procedure. According to the information given by the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office on 7 September 2011, the Office submitted a motion for reopening to the Supreme Court. The applicant also had the opportunity to submit his submissions, but he did not do it. On 23 November 2011 the Supreme Court upheld the conviction by the Budapest Regional Court of Appeal’s judgment of 10 October 2007 - No. 3.Bf.62/2007/21 - but re‑characterised the offence as forgery of public documents.
The judgment became final on 23 November 2011.
II. General measures
Publication and dissemination
The judgment was translated and the Hungarian version was published on the website of the Government ().
The Government also sent the judgment to the Office of the National Judicial Council in order to inform the courts about the content of the judgment and to take due account of the findings of the judgment in their future practice.
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 Court in this case, and that Hungary has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, Paragraph 1 of the Convention.
Budapest, 31 October 2012
Zoltán Tallódi
Agent of the Government of Hungary
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 December 2012 at the 1157th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy