Resolution CM/ResDH(2012)91[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Potapenko against Hungary
(Application No. 32318/05, judgment of 1 February 2011, final on 1 May 2011)
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 final judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in the above case and to the violation established (see document DH-DD(2012)373E);
Recalling that the respondent State’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide to by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required :
- of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its above mentioned obligation;
Having examined the action report provided by the government indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgment, including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2012)373E);
Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted;
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination thereof.
Action Report of 30 November 2011
Appl. No. 32318/05
Potapenko, judgement of 1/02/2011 (Revised)
Introductory case summary
The applicant, Alexandr Potapenko, is a Ukrainian national, resident in Hungary since 1986. He complained about the excessive length of criminal proceedings brought against him in 1998 on charges of aggravated fraud. He was acquitted in 2007. He relied on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) of the Convention. Further relying on Article 2 § 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement), he also complained that his passport had been confiscated for seven and a half years of the proceedings against him. The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 6§1 and Article 2§2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention.
I.Individual measures
Just satisfaction rewarded to the applicant was paid on 2 June 2011 (non-pecuniary damage 12,500 € in sum of 3,333,625 HUF). The applicant’s passport was returned to him on 11/09/2006 and he was acquitted on 26/04/2007, thereby ending the domestic proceedings, therefore no further individual measures are necessary in the execution process.
II.General measures
a)Legislation
The Government make reference to the fact that under paragraph a), which was in force at that time but has been repealed since then, of Section 16, subsection (1) of Act XII of 1998 on Travelling Abroad (hereinafter: “Utv”) a person subjected to pending criminal procedure for a crime punishable by imprisonment for up to five or more years, could not travel abroad until the final conclusion of the criminal procedure. On 1 July 2003, Section 308, subsection (1), paragraph b) of Act I of 2002 on the Amendment of Act XIX of 1998 on the Criminal Code repealed Section 16, subsection (1), paragraph a) of the Utv, therefore this restriction in travelling abroad was abolished.
The issue of excessive length of judicial proceedings is being examined within the context of the Timâr group of cases (application no. 36186/97).
b)Publication and dissemination
The decision was translated and the Hungarian version was published on the website of the Government ().
The Government sent the judgement to the Office of the National Judicial Council in order to inform the courts about the content of the judgment and to take due account of the findings of the judgment in their future practice.
III. Conclusions of the respondent state
The Government consider that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case, and that Hungary has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, Paragraph 1 of the Convention. The Government note that the possibility of further similar violations ceased as a result of the above-mentioned legislative change (as regards the freedom of movement violation).
Budapest, 19 March 2012
Zoltân Tallódi
Co-Agent of the Government
of the Republic of Hungary
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 June 2012 at the 1144th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy