Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)185[1]
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Gurepka against Ukraine
(Application No. 61406/00, judgment of 6 September 2005, final on 6 December 2005)
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 this judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the lack of an ordinary appeal against a court’s decision by which the applicant had been found guilty of an administrative offence (violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 7) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;
Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that, the respondent state paid the applicant’s the just satisfaction provided in the judgments (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of
- individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- general measures preventing similar violations;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination of this case.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)185
Information on the measures taken to comply with the judgment in the case of
Gurepka against Ukraine
Introductory case summary
The case concerns a violation of the applicant’s right to a fair trial on account of the lack of an ordinary appeal against a court decision by which the applicant had been found guilty of an administrative offence and sentenced to seven days administrative detention. According to Article 297 of the Code of Administrative Offences in force at the time, only a prosecutor or the president of a higher court could introduce such an appeal. The European Court found this procedure did not constitute an effective remedy given that it was not directly accessible to a party to the proceedings and did not depend on his or her motion and arguments (violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 7).
I.Payments of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
1,000 EUR
-
1,000 EUR
Paid on 22/03/2006 plus default interest
b) Individual measures
The applicant is no longer in detention. The Court granted the applicant just satisfaction in respect of the non-pecuniary damage sustained.
Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.
II.General measures
a) Legislative amendments
On 24/09/2008 the Code on Administrative Offences was amended by Parliament. The amendments provided the possibility for parties to the proceedings to appeal against court decisions in respect of the administrative offences (Article 287). The amendments came into force on 17/11/ 2008.
b) Publication of the judgment
The judgment was translated into Ukrainian and placed on the official website of the Ministry of Justice (). It was published in the government’s official bulletin, the Official Herald of Ukraine [Ofitsiinyi Visnyk Ukrainy], no. 3 of 02/2008, as well as in a number of specialised legal journals.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that no other individual measure is required, apart from the payment of the just satisfaction, that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that Ukraine has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 2 December 2010 at the 1100th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy