Resolution ResDH(2004)84
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 28 October 1999
in the case of Wille against Liechtenstein
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 December 2004
at the 906th 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, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Wille case delivered on 28 October 1999 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 28396/95) against Liechtenstein, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 25 August 1995 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Herbert Wille, a Liechtenstein national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaints that his right to freedom of expression had been violated, that he had not had access to a tribunal for the protection of his professional reputation, that he had not had access to a remedy before a national authority and that he had been discriminated against on account of his legal opinion;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission and by the Government, respectively on 24 and 27 October 1998, under former Articles 32, paragraph 1 and 47, of the Convention;
Whereas in its judgment of 28 October 1999 the Court:
- held, by sixteen votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 10 of the Convention;
- held, by sixteen votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;
- held, unanimously, that it was not necessary to consider whether there had been a violation of Article 6 of the Convention and of Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 10;
- held, unanimously, that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicant, within three months, 10,000 Swiss francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage and 91 014 05 Swiss francs in respect of costs and expenses and that simple interest at an annual rate of 5% would be payable on those sums from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
- dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the applicant's claim for just satisfaction;
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 of 28 October 1999, having regard to Liechtenstein's obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state gave the Committee information about the measures taken preventing new violations of the same kind as those found in the present judgment; this information appears in the appendix to this resolution;
Having satisfied itself that on 24 February 2000, after the expiry of the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment of 28 October 1999, and that the default interest due, that is 373.60 Swiss francs, was paid on 29 March 2000,
Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of Liechtenstein, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2004)84
Information provided by the Government of Liechtenstein
during the examination of the Wille case
by the Committee of Ministers
In order to remedy the causes of the violations found in this case, the State Court Act (Gesetz über den Staatsgerichtshof, StGHG) was modified on 27 November 2003 (in force as of 20 January 2004) in order to clarify the competence of the State Court to hear cases of alleged violations of the Convention by any public authority.
Article 15 of the new Act introduces a right of individual application (Individualbeschwerde) to this Court for review of the conformity with the Convention of any exercise of state power (öffentliche Gewalt). According to the explanatory report to the Act, this new remedy was created inter alia to meet the requirements of Article 13 of the Convention and also covers individual acts of the Prince.
The Government of Liechtenstein emphasises that there is no contradiction between this provision and Article 7, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, concerning the Prince's immunity. In fact this immunity only applies to the Prince in his person as Head of State, but not to his acts.
Following this change, the State Court is now competent to examine complaints similar to those of Mr Wille.
Moreover, the State Court gives direct effect to the Convention and to the European Court's case-law (see e.g. the State Court judgment of 4 October 1994 giving direct effect to Article 10 of the Convention; case no. StGH 1994/6, published in LES 1995, p.23).
In this context, the Government notes that the European Court's judgment was published in German in the Liechtensteinische Juristen-Zeitung, December 2000 edition.
Considering the nature of the violation, the Government does not consider, with regard to the applicant's individual situation, that other measures apart from the payment of the just satisfaction are necessary.
Accordingly, the Government is of the opinion that the aforementioned measures will prevent new violations similar to those found by the European Court, and that Liechtenstein has thus fulfilled its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention in the present case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy