Resolution ResDH(2002)146
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 19 February 1998
in the case of Guerra and others against Italy
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 December 2002
at the 819th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of former 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 Guerra and others case delivered on 19 February 1998 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 14967/89) against Italy, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 18 October 1988 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Ms Anna Maria Guerra and thirty-nine other Italian applicants, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint concerning the failure by the competent authorities to provide information about the inherent risk and how to proceed in the event of a major accident in a nearby high-risk chemical factory;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 16 September 1996;
Whereas in its judgment of 19 February 1998 the Court:
- dismissed, by nineteen votes to one, the Government’s preliminary objection;
- held, by eighteen votes to two, that Article 10 of the Convention was not applicable in the instant case;
- held, unanimously, that Article 8 of the Convention was applicable and had been violated;
- held, unanimously, that it was unnecessary to consider the case under Article 2 of the Convention also;
- held, unanimously:
(a) that the government of the respondent state was to pay each of the applicants, within three months, 10 000 000 Italian lire in respect of non-pecuniary damage; and
(b) that simple interest at an annual rate of 5% should be payable on that sum from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
- dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the claim for just satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention as amended by Protocol No. 11, these Rules are applicable by decision of the Committee of Ministers to cases under former Article 54;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 19 February 1998, having regard to Italy’s obligation under former 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 submitted the information contained in the appendix to the present resolution;
Having satisfied itself that on 3 September 1999, the government of the respondent state paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment of 19 February 1998, partially including the default interest due, and having taken note of the fact that the applicants have waived their right to the full payment of default interest,
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Italy, that it has exercised its functions under former Article 54 of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2002)146
Information provided by the Government of Italy
during the examination of the Guerra case
by the Committee of Ministers
The Italian Government observes that the violation found in this case was the result of the incorrect application, at different levels, of the Italian legislation in force at the time, mainly presidential decree n° 175 of 18 May 1988 implementing Directive 82/501/EEC of the Council of the European Communities (“the Seveso Directive”).
In order to draw the attention of the different authorities concerned to these implementation problems and to their obligation to ensure henceforth that the application of this legislation respects the requirements of Article 8 of the Convention so as to effectively prevent new, similar violations, the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights was rapidly sent out to all authorities concerned. The public was also informed of the European Court’s judgment and the resulting obligations incumbent on the Italian authorities, following its publication in Italian translation in several Italian legal journals, notably “Rivista Internazionale dei Diritti dell’Uomo”, No. 2; May-August 1998, pp. 514-523. A summary of the judgment is also available in Italian translation on the internet web site of La Consulta per la Giustizia Europea dei Diritti dell'Uomo (organised by a number of associations of lawyers): www.dirittiuomo.it. These awareness-raising measures have contributed to the development of practices ensuring that today, adequate information regarding environmental hazards is rapidly provided.
The Government also draws attention to the fact that the activities concerned in the case ceased definitively in 1994 and that the inquiries subsequently conducted by authorities have confirmed the absence ever since of any high risk activity or stock, according to the criteria established by the legislation in force in this field. The Government thus finds that there is no call today for any further measures in respect of the applicants in this case.
In the light of the above measures and considerations the Government is of the opinion that Italy has satisfied its obligation to abide by the Court’s judgment laid down in former Article 53 of the Convention.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy