Resolution ResDH(2003)92
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 29 September 1999 (final on 29 December 1999)
in the case of Djaid against France
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 June 2003
at the 841st 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, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Djaid case delivered on 29 September 1999 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 38687/97) against France, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 23 July 1995 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Karim Djaid, an Algerian national, and that the Court, seised of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaint concerning the excessive length of the criminal proceedings brought against him in particular before the Cour de cassation;
Whereas in its judgment of 29 September 1999 the Court unanimously:
- held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
- held that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicant, within three months from the date at which the judgment became final, 20 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage and that simple interest at an annual rate of 3,47% would be payable on this sum from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 29 September 1999, having regard to France’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new violations of the same kind as that found in this case, particularly through changes in the processing and examination of appeals and staff reinforcement with a view to remedying the workload of certain chambers of the Cour de cassation (see Resolution ResDH(2003)88 in the Hermant case);
Having satisfied itself that on 14 January 2000, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sum provided for in the judgment of 29 September 1999,
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy