resolution DH (99) 552
CONCERNING THE JUDGMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
OF 2 September 1998
IN THE CASE OF Erkalo AGAINST the Netherlands
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 8 October 1999
at the 680th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Erkalo case delivered on 2 September 1998 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 23807/94) against the Netherlands, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 12 October 1993 under Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Dawit Shugute Erkalo, an Ethiopian national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaints that upon expiry of the statutory period of the applicant's placement at the disposal of the government, his detention had become unlawful; that the decision to extend his placement was not made in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law; that he did not receive a speedy review of the lawfulness of his detention and that he was unable to appeal against the decision to extend his detention;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 22 September 1997;
Whereas in its judgment of 2 September 1998 the Court:
- dismissed, unanimously, the Government’s preliminary objection concerning the non-exhaustion of domestic remedies;
- held, by eight votes to one, that there had been a breach of Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
- held, unanimously, that it was not necessary to decide on the applicant’s complaint under Article 5, paragraph 4, of the Convention in respect of the alleged breach of his right to a speedy review of his detention;
- held, unanimously, that it did not propose to examine whether there has been a violation of Article 5, paragraph 4, and Article 13 of the Convention in respect of the alleged absence of a right of appeal;
- held, unanimously, that the finding of a violation of Article 5, paragraph 1, constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage; that the respondent State was to pay the applicant, within three months, for costs and expenses, 6 475 Dutch guilders, together with any value-added tax that may be chargeable and that simple interest at an annual rate of 6% should be payable from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
- dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 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 2 September 1998, having regard to the Netherlands' obligation under Article 53 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 drew the Committee’s attention to the fact that, on account of the specific circumstances of the case, new similar violations of the Convention could be avoided for the future by informing the authorities concerned of the requirements of the Convention: copies of the judgment had accordingly been sent out to them; in addition, the Court’s judgment was published in Nederlands Juristenblad (Netherlands Lawyers' Journal) on 23 October 1998, issue 38;
Having satisfied itself that on 9 November 1998, within the time-limit set, the Government of the respondent State paid the applicant the sum provided for in the judgment of 2 September 1998,
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of the Netherlands, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy