Resolution CM/ResDH(2015)238
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Tănase and others against Romania
Application Nos.
Case
Judgment of
Final on
62954/00
TĂNASE AND OTHERS
26/05/2009
26/08/2009
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 December 2015
at the 1243rd 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, 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 this case;
Recalling that the applicants’ admissible complaints in this case concerned the consequences of racially-motivated violence, in 1991, against villagers of Roma[1] origin, in particular improper living conditions following the destruction of their homes and the subsequent proceedings before the domestic courts (complaints under Articles 3, 6, 8, 13, and 14 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1);
Recalling that the European Court gave a judgment endorsing a unilateral declaration by which the Romanian Government accepted that the events at issue had given rise to violations of Articles 3, 6, 8, 13, and 14 of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and undertook to pay each of the applicants certain sums in compensation as well as cost and expenses; that it also undertook to adopt several general measures to fight discrimination against the Roma in the county concerned, to stimulate their participation in the economic, social, educational, cultural and political life of the local community, to support positives changes in public opinion in their respect, to rehabilitate housing and the environment in the area concerned as well as to prevent and solve conflicts likely to generate violence;
Noting that in its judgment the Court decided, unanimously, to strike the case out of the list since the requirements for the application of Article 37 paragraph 1 (c) of the Convention were met in the present case, and that no other particular consideration related to respect for the human rights guaranteed in the Convention, justified pursuit of the application under Article 37, paragraph 1 in fine;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment, having regard to its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention to abide by it;
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 sums provided for in the judgment (see document DH-DD(2015)1159);
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention with respect to the commitments subscribed to in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination thereof.
[1] The terms “Roma and Travellers” are being used at the Council of Europe to encompass the wide diversity of the groups covered by the work of the Council of Europe in this field: on the one hand a) Roma, Sinti/Manush, Calé, Kaale, Romanichals, Boyash/Rudari; b) Balkan Egyptians (Egyptians and Ashkali); c) Eastern groups (Dom, Lom and Abdal); and, on the other hand, groups such as Travellers, Yenish, and the populations designated under the administrative term “Gens du voyage”, as well as persons who identify themselves as Gypsies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy