Resolution CM/ResDH(2008)30[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Lyashko against Ukraine
(Application No. 21040/02, judgment of 10 August 2006, final on 10 November 2006)
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 a disproportionate interference with the applicant's freedom of expression due to his criminal conviction for publishing four articles criticising certain state officials (violation of Article 10) (see details in Appendix).
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with Ukraine's 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, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (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 judgment, 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;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix) and considering the decision taken at the 1007th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies (15‑17 October 2007), 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(2008)30
Information about the measures taken to comply with the judgment
in the case of Lyashko against Ukraine
Introductory case summary
The case concerns a disproportionate interference in the applicant's right to freedom of expression due to his criminal conviction for publishing four articles criticising certain state officials including the acting Prime Minister (violation of Article 10). In 2001, he was convicted at first instance, given a suspended prison sentence and banned from holding certain posts involving media management for two years. The applicant's guilt was confirmed in substance at appeal but his sentence was quashed, the charges against him having been decriminalised and the period of statutory limitation expired.
The European Court found that the press articles in question concerned important issues of public interest and there was nothing to suggest that they had been motivated by any deliberate intention on the applicant's part to damage the reputations of the persons concerned. The court also found that the applicant's assertions in the articles were value judgements which were not susceptible of proof. In addition, it found that the applicant's conviction after several years' proceedings had probably had a negative impact on his freedom of expression particularly since his guilt had been confirmed in substance at appeal.
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
2 000 EUR
1 000 EUR
3 000 EUR
Paid on 22/12/2006
b) Individual measures
Following the Court's judgment, by letter of 01/12/2006 the Government Agent before the European Court of Human Rights informed the applicant about the possibility provided by the law currently in force to apply for review of proceedings under exceptional circumstances. The applicant has lodged no application for such a revision.
The Ukrainian authorities further indicated that according to Article 88 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine of 05/03/2001, in cases of suspended sentence, the conviction does not appear in the criminal record.
II.General measures
Ukraine has already adopted legislative and other measures to bring its legislation and practice in line with the European Court's case-law on freedom of expression (see Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)13 in the case of Ukrainian Media Group).
The judgment of the European Court has been translated into Ukrainian and placed on the Ministry of Justice's official website. The summary of the judgment in Ukrainian was published in the Official Herald of Ukraine, No. 19 (2007) and the Government Courier, No. 237 of 15/12/2006.
By letter of the Government Agent before the European Court of Human Rights of 01/12/2006, the attention of the Supreme Court of Ukraine was drawn to the Court's conclusions in the present case in order to take them into account in its daily practice. The judgment has been disseminated by the Supreme Court of Ukraine to courts of lower instances. The Supreme Court of Ukraine has also instructed courts of appeal to carry out a special study of the judgment with judges of local courts and courts of appeal, in order to bring judicial practice into conformity with the Convention and the Court's case-law. The studies were held in the majority of regions.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures taken have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case, that these measures will prevent new, 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 27 March 2008 at the 1020th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy