Resolution CM/ResDH(2013)38[1]
Witek against Poland
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
(Application No. 13453/07, judgment of 21 December 2010, final on 11 April 2011)
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 violations established (see document DH-DD(2011)1044E);
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(2011)1044E);
Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 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[2]
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Witek against Poland
Case description
Witek, application no. 13453/07, judgment of 21/12/2010, final on 11/04/2011
The case concerns the applicant’s unlawful detention in a psychiatric hospital from 19/06/2006 to 11/01/2007 (violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention).
The applicant was placed in a psychiatric hospital on 19/06/2006 on the basis of expert evidence obtained in 1999 and 2000. It was only on 7/09/2006 that the Kielce District Court ordered that the applicant be examined by expert psychiatrists. The expert evidence confirming the need to continue the applicant’s detention was submitted to the District Court only on 7/11/2006 and examined at a hearing held on 11/01/2007. The European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”) found that in the circumstances of the present case the District Court had not ordered an expert opinion promptly enough (only three months after the applicant’s placement in the hospital).
The case also concerns the delay in the proceedings by which the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of her detention in the psychiatric hospital (violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention). The Court observed that both the applicant’s and her lawyer’s appeals against the decision of 11/01/2007, lodged on 15 January and 24 January 2007 respectively, were examined together on 23/02/2007. The Court found that in the circumstances of the present case the delay of thirty days could not be considered compatible with the requirement of “speediness” laid down in Article 5 § 4 of the Convention
Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
6 000 EUR
-
6 000 EUR
Paid on 01/06/2011
Individual measures
The applicant was released from the psychiatric hospital on 16/11/2007. The Court awarded the applicant just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
In these circumstances, no other individual measure appears necessary.
General measures
The violations of Article 5 § 1 and Article 5 § 4 of the Convention in the present case were rather of an isolated nature and resulted from failure of a national court. Therefore, it seems that publication and dissemination of the Court’s judgment would be appropriated in order to avoid similar violations in the future.
In this context it should be noted, that the Court’s judgment was translated into Polish and published on the website of the Ministry of Justice (). The judgment will be sent to all courts of appeal and the General Prosecutor’s Office with request to disseminate it among judges and prosecutors. It will be also sent to the National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution with request to include it in the training program addressed to judges and prosecutors.
In these circumstances, no other general measure appears necessary.
III.Conclusions of the responding state
The Government considers that other individual measures are not necessary in the present case and that the general measures adopted, in particular publication and dissemination of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, will be sufficient to conclude that Poland has complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 7 March 2013 at the 1164th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
[2] Information submitted by the Polish authorities on 14 October 2011
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy