Resolution CM/ResDH(2018)284
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Two cases against Latvia
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 5 September 2018 at the 1322nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
Application No.
Case
Judgment of
Final on
37105/09
ĻUTOVA
09/11/2017
09/11/2017
70890/13+
SILKĀNE AND OTHERS
08/06/2017
08/06/2017
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 final judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee in these cases and to the violations established on account of the excessive length of civil proceedings;
Recalling the respondent State’s obligation, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:
- of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with the above-mentioned obligation;
Having examined the action report provided by the government indicating the individual measures adopted to give effect to the judgments, including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2018)619);
Considering that the question of individual measures was resolved given that the domestic proceedings have been terminated in all cases;
Recalling that the question of general measures required in response to the shortcomings found by the Court in these cases continues to be examined within the framework of the Veiss case and that the closure of these cases therefore in no way prejudges the Committee’s evaluation of the general measures required;
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases as regards the individual measures and
DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy