Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)276[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Menemen Minibüsçüler Odası against Turkey
(Application No. 44088/04, judgment of 09/12/2008, final on 09/03/2009)
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 unjustified interference with the applicant’s right of access to a court (Article 6§1) (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 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;
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(2011)276
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Menemen Minibüsçüler Odası against Turkey
The case concerns unjustified interference with the applicant’s right of access to a court. The applicant, a chamber of commerce engaged in private trade providing transport services for the public, was not informed when a competing co-operative appealed against administrative acts having an impact on its public transport activities. This was in spite of the wording of section 31 of the Code of Administrative Procedure which provides essentially that the judge must, ex officio, notify the introduction of administrative appeals to those to whom the matter at issue seems to present an interest. The European Court found that the failure to comply with this provision had prevented the applicant from having a hearing in a matter concerning its rights and obligations (violation of Article 6§1).
I.Individual measures
The European Court rejected the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction in respect of pecuniary damage, considering that it could not speculate as to the outcome of the proceedings had the violation not occurred. The applicant made no claim in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
It is possible for the applicant to request the reopening of domestic proceedings in accordance with Article 53/1(ı) of the Law on Administrative Procedure. This provision allows the reopening of proceedings following a violation found by the European Court.
Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.
II.General measures
The European Court’s judgment was translated into Turkish, sent out to the high courts and relevant authorities, and published on the official web site of the Turkish Ministry of Justice (). The Turkish authorities considered that the problem revealed by this judgment was an isolated one, and that the publication and dissemination of the Court’s judgment would therefore be sufficient to prevent similar violations in the future. Therefore no further general measure appears necessary.
III.Conclusions
The government considers that no individual measure is required, apart from the payment of the just satisfaction, that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that Turkey has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 2 December 2011 at the 1128th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy