Resolution DH (99) 721
Concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 6 July 1999
in the case of Millan I Tornes against Andorra
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 3 December 1999
at the 688th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
the Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Millan I Tornes case delivered on 6 July 1999 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Article 44 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 35052/97) against Andorra, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 7 August 1996 under previous Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Joan Millan I Tornes, an Andorran national, and that the Court, seized of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaint that the Public Prosecutor’s decision declaring his empara application inadmissible had prevented him from having access to the Constitutional Tribunal of Andorra;
Whereas in its judgment of 6 July 1999 the Court, after having taken formal note of a friendly settlement reached by the government of the respondent state and the applicant (for the full text, see paragraph 19 of the judgment), and having been satisfied that the settlement was based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols decided, unanimously, to strike the case out of its list;
Whereas under the above-mentioned friendly settlement it was agreed that the case was definitively settled due to the entry into force, on 20 May 1999, of the Law modifying the Constitutional Tribunal Rule (published in the Official Gazette of Andorra No. 27), allowing Mr Millan to lodge a new application before the Constitutional Tribunal without the Public Prosecutor’s agreement being required; according to article 2 of the above-mentioned law, any person considering that his constitutional right to judicial protection has not been respected, shall lodge an empara remedy directly before the Constitutional Tribunal; furthermore, under paragraph 2 of the transitional provision, in cases where the Public Prosecutor has decided to dismiss the empara remedy, such a remedy can be lodged before the Constitutional Tribunal within fifteen days from the entry into force of this law;
Recalling that Rule 44, paragraph 2, of the Rules of the Court provides that the striking out of a case shall be effected by means of a judgment which the President shall forward to the Committee of Ministers once it has become final so that it can supervise, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2 of the Convention, the execution of any undertakings which may have been attached to the discontinuance or solution of the matter;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of previous Article 54 which are, for the time being, applicable by analogy to cases transmitted to it under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention,
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Andorra, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy