Resolution ResDH(2006)40
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 17 February 2005 (Friendly settlement)
in the case of Constantin against Romania
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 21 June 2006
at the 966th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Constantin case delivered on 17 February 2005 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 49145/99) against Romania, lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 10 May 1999 under Article 34 of the Convention by Mr Viorel Constantin, a Romanian national, and that the Court declared admissible the complaints concerning ill‑treatment allegedly inflicted on the applicant by the police in April 1995, as well as the alleged unavailability of an effective remedy to obtain compensation for the damage suffered;
Whereas in its judgment of 17 February 2005 the Court, after having taken formal note of a friendly settlement reached by the government of the respondent state and the applicant, and having been satisfied that the settlement was based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols, decided, unanimously to strike the case out of its list and took note of the parties’ undertaking not to request a re-hearing of the case before the Grand Chamber
Whereas under the above-mentioned friendly settlement it was agreed that the Government of Romania would pay the applicant, the sum of 23 000 euros in respect of non-pecuniary, pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, within three months as from the delivery of the judgment and that simple interest would be payable on the sum at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points from the expiry of the above-mentioned thirty days until settlement;
Recalling that Rule 43, paragraph 3, of the Rules of the Court (old Rule 44, paragraph 2) provides that the striking-out of a case shall be effected by means of a judgment which the President shall forward to the Committee of Ministers once it has become final in order to allow it to supervise, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2 of the Convention, the execution of any undertakings which may have been attached to the discontinuance or solution of the matter;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that on 13 May 2005 within the time-limit agreed to under the terms of the friendly settlement, the Government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sum provided for in the friendly settlement and that no other measure was required in the present case to conform to the Court’s judgment,
Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of Romania, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy