Resolution CM/ResDH(2009)51[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Sen against the Netherlands
(Application No. 31465/96, judgment of 21 December 2001, final on 21 March 2002)
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 in this case, transmitted by the Court once it had become final;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns an infringement of the right to respect for private and family life of the applicants, a family of Turkish nationals; the Dutch authorities refused to grant a residence permit to the third applicant to enable her to join her parents, the first two applicants, who were legally residing in the Netherlands (violation of Art. 8) (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 the Netherlands’ 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) and considering the decision taken at the 843rd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies (24 April 2003), 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(2009)51
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Sen against the Netherlands
Introductory case summary
This case concerns an infringement of the right to respect for private and family life of the applicants, a family of Turkish nationals; the Dutch authorities refused to grant a residence permit to the third applicant to enable her to join her parents, the first two applicants, who were legally residing in the Netherlands (violation of Article 8).
The Court concluded that as it left no other alternative to the first two applicants than to relinquish their positions in the Netherlands or to renounce their elder daughter’s company, the respondent state failed to strike a proper balance between the applicants’ interests on the one hand and its own interest in controlling immigration on the other. The Court made it clear that it did not deem necessary to tackle the issue of whether the third applicant’s relatives living in Turkey were ready and able to look after her, as asserted by the respondent state.
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
The applicants did not submit any request for just satisfaction. Therefore the Court ruled that there was no ground to award them any amount in this respect.
The authorities indicated that a residence permit would be delivered to the third applicant, Ms Sinem Sen, as soon as she applied for it but she never requested such a residence permit.
II.General measures
The Court’s judgment was sent out to the authorities concerned; it was also published in the Ministry of Justice journal, in the Nederlands Juristenblad, the NJCM-Bulletin, and in the European Human Rights Cases. A summary was furthermore included in the yearly report from the Minister of Foreign Affairs to parliament on the Court’s judgments in cases against the Netherlands.
As the European Convention of Human Rights and the European Court case-law is taken into account by the Dutch public administration (see judgment paragraphs 16 and 25) and because of the direct effect given to them by courts, this measure will prevent new similar violation.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that these measures will prevent new, similar violations and that the Netherlands has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 2 April 2009 at the 1051st meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy