Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)92[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Hakimi against Belgium
(Application No. 665/08, judgment of 29/06/2010, final on 29/09/2010)
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 the 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 an infringement of the applicant’s right of access to a court due to the refusal by the court of appeal to reopen in absentia proceedings which took place in 2006 (on 9 March 2007 the Court had rejected the applicant’s appeal as “out of time”, although the default judgment had been notified without mentioning Article 187 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or its contents and, therefore, the time limit for filing an appeal) (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1);
Recalling that the Court considered in its judgment that the finding of a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction for the damage claimed (§ 41 of the judgment);
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its 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
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
Noting that, in respect of individual measures, the Court of Cassation in its judgment of 23 February 2011, ordered the re-opening of the proceedings pursuant to Articles 442bis et seq. of the Code of Criminal investigation, withdrew its judgment of 27 June 2007 relating to the applicant’s appeal against the Brussels Appeal Court’s judgment of 9 March 2007 and quashed the Court of Appeal’s judgment of 9 March 2007, and that therefore no other individual measure seems necessary;
Noting that, in respect of general measures, the present case is similar to that of Da Luz Domingues Ferreira against Belgium (application No 50049/99), closed by final resolution CM/DH(2009)119, adopted at the 1072nd meeting of the Ministers Deputies and referring in this regard to the general measures mentioned therein;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state, 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.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 14 September 2011 at the 1120th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy