Resolution CM/ResDH(2012)155[1]
Ivanova against Bulgaria
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
(Application No. 52435/99, judgment of 12 April 2007, final on 12 July 2007)
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)919E);
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)919E);
Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46§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
Case of Ivanova v. Bulgaria, application no. 52435/99,
judgment of 12 April 2007, final on 12 July 2007
The case concerns a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of religion on account of her dismissal in December 1995 from a state-owned school at which her functions did not include teaching (violation of Article 9). The European Court considered that whilst her employment had been ended, on the face of it, in conformity with the law, by modifying the qualifications attached to the post, the dismissal had nonetheless been motivated by religious considerations, being part of a campaign against the activities of a religious organisation, “Word of Life”, of which the applicant was an adherent.
INDIVIDUAL MEASURES
- The European Court awarded pecuniary damage to the applicant, granting in totality her claim to be compensated for having remained without work for a certain period of time. It also made an award in respect of non-pecuniary damage. Those sums were paid by the Government on 11 October 2007.
- At the time of entry into force of the European Court’s judgment, it was possible for the applicant to seek the re-opening of the civil proceedings for unfair dismissal which she had brought (Article 231 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in force until 1 March 2008). She did not avail herself of that possibility.
The Government considers that no further individual measures are necessary in the case to erase the consequences of the violation.
GENERAL MEASURES
- Freedom of religion in Bulgaria is guaranteed by the Constitution of 1991 (Articles 13 and 37) and the Religious Denominations Act of 2002. Protection against discrimination is provided for by the Constitution (Articles 6 and 38) and in particular by the Protection Against Discrimination Act of 2003, which, in the context of the exercise of the right to labour, expressly forbids any dismissal based on religious convictions (sections 4 and 21). The Protection Against Discrimination Act alleviates the burden of proof for plaintiffs wishing to show discrimination. It creates a Commission for Protection Against Discrimination, which examines individual complaints. Anyone alleging discrimination may also directly address the courts. There exists already abundant practice of the courts in the application of the Act. In addition, the Labour Code (Article 8 § 3) prohibits discrimination in the exercise of labour rights based, inter alia, on religion.
- The Court’s judgment in the present case has been translated into Bulgarian and published on the website of the Ministry of Justice ( ). It has also been disseminated amongst the relevant State bodies.
The Government is of the view that the legislation cited above, most notably the Protection Against Discrimination Act of 2003, which was adopted and entered into force after the events in the case at hand took place, affords sufficient protection of the right not to be dismissed on the basis of one’s religious convictions and thus makes it unlikely that violations similar to the one in Mrs Ivanova’s case will occur in the future. Although the present case appears to be an isolated one, where the courts examining Mrs Ivanova’s claim for unfair dismissal failed to duly take into account her allegations of discrimination based on her religion, it was considered important to publish and disseminate the Court’s judgment, which could help preventing the national courts’ taking a similar approach in the future. Lastly, the Government notes that the negative attitude towards new “sects”, prevalent in Bulgaria in the 1990s, has since then significantly attenuated.
The Government is thus of the view that no further general measures are necessary in the case.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 December 2012 at the 1157th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy