Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)203[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Zarb against Malta
(Application No. 16631/04, judgment of 4 July 2006, final on 4 October 2006)
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 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 excessive length of criminal proceedings which lasted from April 1991 until January 2004 before two levels of jurisdiction (violation of Article 6§1) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its 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, within 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 by the Court in its judgments, 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
- of general measures, preventing similar violations;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), 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(2010)203
Information on the measures taken to comply with the judgment in the case of
Zarb against Malta
Introductory case summary
This case concerns the excessive length of criminal proceedings against the applicant which lasted from April 1991 until January 2004 (i.e. a total of 12 years, 9 months) before two levels of jurisdiction. The Constitutional Court found that the length of the proceedings had been excessive and awarded compensation to the applicant. The European Court agreed with the conclusion of the Constitutional Court, however found that the compensation awarded was inadequate (violation of Article 6§1).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
EUR 4,500
EUR 1,700
EUR 6,200
Paid on 2 November 2006
b) Individual measures
The criminal proceedings against the applicant were concluded on 15/01/2004. Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.
II.General measures
The European Court noted that Maltese law enabled the applicant to raise his complaint about the excessive length of the proceedings in the national courts. It considered that the fact that the amount awarded was low in this case did not render the remedy in itself ineffective. In the light of these findings, the case does not reveal any structural problem and is similar to the case of Calleja (Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)9).
All judgments of the European Court against Malta are automatically sent out to competent authorities and are publicly available via the website of the Ministry of Justice and Home affairs which provides a direct link to the European Court’s website ().
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that these measures will prevent similar violations and that Malta have thus complied with their obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 2 December 2010 at the 1100th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy