Resolution CM/ResDH(2008)2[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Mkrtchyan against Armenia
(Application No. 6562/03, judgment of 11 January 2007, final on 11 April 2007)
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 breach of the applicant's right of freedom of assembly and association in that, after having participated in a demonstration in 2002, he was convicted of an offence on the basis of a law – namely the “prescribed rules” referred to in Article 180.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences – which was not formulated with such precision as to enable the applicant to foresee, to a degree reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences of his actions (violation of Article 11);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with Armenia'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;
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;
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(2008)2
Information about the measures taken to comply with the judgment
in the case of Mkrtchyan against Armenia
Introductory case summary
The case concerns a violation of the applicant's right of freedom of assembly and association in that, after having participated in a demonstration in 2002, he was convicted of an offence on the basis of a law – namely the “prescribed rules” referred to in Article 180.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences – which was not formulated with such precision as to enable the applicant to foresee, to a degree reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences of his actions (violation of Article 11).
The Court noted in particular that the domestic courts failed to refer in their decisions to law prescribing rules for holding rallies and street processions.
I.Just satisfaction and individual measures
The applicant was sentenced to a fine equivalent to one euro; he made no claim in respect of pecuniary damage. Moreover, the European Court held that the finding of a violation constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicant.
Therefore, no individual measure seemed to be necessary.
II.General measures
After the facts at the origin of this case on 28/04/2004, the Armenian Parliament adopted a law regulating the procedure for holding assemblies, rallies, street processions and demonstrations.
The judgment of the European Court was translated into Armenian and published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Armenia (No. 46(570)), as well as on the official website of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia (), and mentioned on the website of the news agency of the Republic of Armenia ().
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures taken will prevent new, similar violations and that Armenia 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