Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)218[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Ouranio Toxo and others against Greece
(Application No. 74989/01, judgment of 20 October 2005, final on 20 January 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 violations of the Convention found by the Court in this case concern the applicants’ freedom of association on account of the acts and omissions of the national authorities in protecting the applicant party from incidents against it (violation of Article 11 of the Convention) as well as the excessive length of criminal proceedings combined with civil action for damages lodged by the applicants (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with Greece’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 applicants 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), 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)218
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Ouranio Toxo and others against Greece
Introductory case summary
The case concerns the violation of the right to freedom of association of the applicants (a lawfully constituted political party and 2 members of its political secretariat) by the acts and omissions of the national authorities in protecting the applicant party from incidents against it by protestors from the local population, which resulted in an attack and damage to the party premises.
In September 1995 the police removed a sign with the name of the party in Macedonian, which also made ambiguous connotations, following an order of the public prosecutor of Florina, on grounds of public order. The replacement of the sign by the applicants was followed by a protest against them organized by the local town council and by attacks to the headquarters of the political party by a crowd of people. The police officers and afterwards the public prosecutor took no action against those involved.
The European Court noted that “the risk of causing tension within a community by using political terms in public does not suffice, by itself, to justify interference with freedom of association” (§41 of judgment). It considered that in the present case, the local authorities should have advocated a conciliatory stance, rather than to stir up confrontational attitudes. The Court also noted that the police took no preventive or protective measures during these events (claiming lack of police manpower) and that the public prosecutor did not find it necessary to initiate an investigation to determine responsibility. For these reasons, the Court found that the authorities failed in their “positive obligations inherent in the effective respect of freedom of association” (§37 of judgment) (violation of Article 11).
The case also concerns the excessive length of the criminal proceedings combined with civil action for damages lodged by the applicants (more than 7 years solely for the investigation of the case) (violation of Article 6§1).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
2 000 EUR
30 000 EUR
3 245 EUR
35 245 EUR
Paid on 02/05/2006
The just satisfaction has been paid in conditions apparently accepted by the applicants.
b) Individual measures
1. Violation of Article 6: The internal proceedings in question were closed on 30 January 2003.
2. Violation of Article 11: Four members of the political party, two of which were the second and third applicants, lodged a criminal complaint as civil parties against those responsible for the incidents referred to in the judgment. The Indictment Division of the Florina Criminal Court decided to discontinue criminal proceedings against the persons named in the complaint, as it considered that there existed insufficient evidence against them. This decision was upheld at second instance, as well as by the Court of Cassation (paragraphs 17-22 of the judgment)
The general measures adopted (see general measures below), following the Court’s judgment, aim at reinforcing citizens’ safety and security, by enhanced police action, especially with regard to "targets of polical interest" such as political parties, also apply directly to the applicant political party. Thus they cover the individual measures required to ensure the effective protection of the freedom of association of the applicant political party and its members, in accordance with the Convention as interpreted by the Court in this case. It is also noted that the applicant party has not raised a similar complaint ever since.
Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Minsters.
II.General measures
1. Violation of Article 11: (a) Subsequent to the facts of the case, the police reassessed their objectives and adopted a new anti-crime strategy taking into consideration recent studies, international practice and relevant Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers. Thus, a series of new decrees, orders and decisions were issued by the police between 2002 and 2006 concerning in particular visible operations of police officers, including patrols.
In particular, Order 1026/31.05.2006, issued following the judgment of the European Court, provides that, with a view to reinforcing citizens’ sense of security, sensitive targets, including those of particular political interest (political parties’ offices, local organisations etc), are under 24-hour surveillance so that any risk of aggression is avoided. Particular emphasis is placed on the need to provide immediate and effective assistance in case of riots against such targets. This order was sent out to all police headquarters on the understanding that police directors should personally supervise its implementation. It was accompanied by a letter of the Head of the Greek Police expressly mentioning that this order had been issued in compliance with the Court’s judgment, which was also appended.
(b) Wide dissemination of the European Court’s judgment took place: it was transmitted to the Ministry of Public Order, the Head of Police and the Ministry of Justice and translated and published at the site of the Legal Council of the State (). It was also sent out to all competent judicial authorities by the Court of Cassation, as well as to the competent local authorities in Florina (municipal and regional authorities, police, judges and prosecutors) accompanied by an explanatory note.
2. Violation of Article 6§1: Greece has adopted a number of legislative and other measures to accelerate proceedings before criminal courts (see Final Resolution ResDH(2005)66 on Tarighi Wageh Dashti and 7 other cases against Greece). However, additional issues in this field are highlighted in more recent judgments. The measures taken or envisaged by the Greek authorities are being supervised by the Committee of Ministers in the Vassilios Athanasiou / Manios group.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that no individual measures are required apart from the payment of the just satisfaction, that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations to those found in the present cases and that, in this respect, Greece has 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