RESOLUTION DH (96) 608
CONCERNING THE JUDGMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
OF 23 SEPTEMBER 1994
IN THE CASE OF HOKKANEN AGAINST FINLAND
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 November 1996
at the 576th 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 case of Hokkanen against Finland delivered on 23 September 1994 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No.19823/92) against Finland, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 10 April 1992 under Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Teuvo Hokkanen, a Finnish citizen, on his own behalf and on that of his daughter, Ms Sini Hokkanen, also a Finnish national, and that the Commission declared admissible the applicant's complaints of violations of his rights under Articles 8 and 13 of the Convention and Article 5 of Protocol No. 7, concerning on the one hand, the non-enforcement of court orders granting him custody of as well as visiting rights to Sini and, on the other hand, the transfer of his custody to the child's maternal grand-parents;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 9 December 1993;
Whereas, in its judgment of 23 September 1994, the Court:
– held, unanimously, that the non-enforcement of the applicant's right of access from 10 May 1990 until 21 October 1993 constituted a violation of Article 8 of the Convention;
– held, by six votes to three, that there was no such violation thereafter;
– held, by six votes to three, that the non-enforcement after 10 May 1990 of his right of custody and the subsequent transfer of the custody to the grandparents did not constitute a violation of Article 8 of the Convention;
– held, unanimously, that it was not necessary to examine the applicant's complaint under Article 5 of Protocol No. 7;
– held, unanimously, that the Court's examination under Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention was limited to the complaint concerning the length of the second set of custody proceedings and that there had been no violation of this provision;
– held, unanimously, that it was not necessary to examine the applicant's allegations under Article 13 of the Convention;
– held, unanimously, that the Government of Finland was to pay to the applicant, within three months and together with any value-added tax that might be chargeable, 100 000 Finnish marks for non-pecuniary damage, and, for legal fees and expenses 135 000 Finnish marks, less 8 070 French francs to be converted into Finnish marks at the rate applicable on the date of delivery of the present judgment;
– 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 54 of the Convention;
Having invited the Government of Finland to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 23 September 1994, having regard to Finland's 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 Finland gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;
Having satisfied itself that within the time-limit set, the Government of Finland paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment of 23 September 1994,
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Finland that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution DH (96) 608
Information provided by the Government of Finland
during the examination of the case of Hokkanen
by the Committee of Ministers
The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights has been communicated to the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health and other authorities. In addition, in a seminar on custody, right to access and protection of children organised by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health in March 1996 for some 150 social workers, emphasis was laid, inter alia, on the necessity of avoiding situations such as that obtaining in the Hokkanen case was stressed.
Furthermore, in order to ensure that the jurisprudence of the European Court is easily accessible, notably to the courts and other the authorities as well as to practising lawyers and applicants, the Finnish abstract of the Hokkanen judgment has been entered into the legal database “Finnlex”.
The government is of the opinion that, considering that the Convention has direct effect in Finnish law and that the domestic law should be interpreted in accordance with the judgments of the European Court (see the Supreme Court's judgments of 2 June 1992, KKO 1992:73, of 31 May 1995, and KKO 1995:95, of 6 November 1995 in case S94/1347 (not yet published)), the authorities concerned will use their best endeavours to prevent the repetition of a violation similar to the one found by the European Court in the present case.
Accordingly, the government considers that it has met its obligations under Article 53 of the Convention.
The government wishes to add, nevertheless, that a legislative amendment, concerning the execution of decisions in cases regarding child custody and access, enters into force in December 1996 and that the Hokkanen case has been taken into account in the elaboration of the new law so as to ensure compliance therewith.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy