Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)31[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Soudek against the Czech Republic
(Application No. 56526/00, judgment of 15 March 2005, final on 15 June 2005)
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 referred to as “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 the lack of access to the Constitutional Court due to a particularly strict interpretation of the procedural requirements (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1) (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 Czech Republic'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, after the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicant 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
- general measures preventing, similar violations;
Having examined the measures taken by the respondent state to that effect, the details of which appear in the Appendix,
DECLARES 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(2007)31
Information on the measures taken to comply with the judgment in the case of
Soudek against the Czech Republic
Introductory case summary
This case concerns a violation of the right of access to the Constitutional Court, which in 1999 rejected the applicant's complaint as out of time, penalising him for appealing on a point of law before lodging his constitutional complaint (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1). The European Court held that the applicant was deprived of effective protection of his rights due to a very strict interpretation of the procedural rules governing the admissibility of constitutional appeals, especially the requirement to exhaust available remedies (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
-
500 EUR
500 EUR
Paid on 21/09/2005
b) Individual measures
The Court found that the finding of a violation was in itself sufficient just satisfaction. Considering the nature of the violation, the prejudice suffered by the applicant and the fact that his case had been considered on the merits at both first instance and appeal, no specific individual measures would appear necessary. In addition, the applicant has submitted no request for such measures.
II.General measures
This case presents similarities to that of Zvolský and Zvolská and to that of Bĕlĕs and others against the Czech Republic. Following the European Court's judgments in the cases of Bĕlĕs and Zvolský, the Czech Constitutional Court in 2003 announced a change in its practice concerning admissibility criteria for constitutional appeals. According to this general decision, the deadline of sixty days for introducing a constitutional appeal will run from the date of notification of the decision at extraordinary appeal (such as an appeal on points of law) regardless of the outcome. The deadline is also considered to be met in relation to an earlier decision given at appeal and having acquired the status of res iudicata.
Subsequently, Parliament adopted Law No. 83/2004 (which entered into force on 1 April 2004), which modified the previous Law, No. 182/1993 on the Constitutional Court. According to the new law (Article 75§1), it is not indispensable to have recourse to an extraordinary appeal, admissibility of which depends only on the discretionary assessment of the competent organ, such as the appeal on points of law at issue in the present case, before bringing the case before the Constitutional Court. What is more, in cases where an extraordinary appeal is declared inadmissible by the competent organ solely on the basis of its discretionary assessment, a constitutional complaint may be lodged within 60 days from notification of the decision on the admissibility of the appeal at issue (Article 72§4).
The judgment of the European Court has been published on the website of the Ministry of Justice () and has been sent out to the authorities concerned.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures taken will prevent similar new violations in the future in Czech Republic and as a consequence has fulfilled its obligations pursuant to Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 April 2007 at the 992nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy