Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)77[1]
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Stojanović, Jovančić & Milošević against Serbia
(Application No. 34425/04, judgment of 19/05/2009, final on 19/08/2009,
Application No. 38968/04, judgment of 05/10/2010,
and Application No. 32484/03, judgment of 18/01/2011)
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 judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concern unlawful interference with the applicants’ correspondence by the prison authorities (violation of Article 8) (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 judgments;
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;
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the 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
- 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 these cases and
DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)77
Information on the measures taken to comply with the judgments in the cases of
Stojanović, Jovančić & Milošević against Serbia
Introductory case summary
These cases concern violations of the applicants’ right to respect for their private life in that the prison authorities unlawfully opened their correspondence with domestic bodies and the Court (violation of Article 8).
The Court noted that no court decision had ever been issued as required under domestic law in respect of the interference with the applicants’ correspondence and that the applicable prison rules and regulations had been themselves vague in this regard. Therefore, it concluded that the interference with the applicants’ correspondence was not in “accordance with the law”.
I. Individual measures
The Court held that the finding of the violation constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants. Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.
II.General measures
The authorities of the respondent state have taken a number of measures to eliminate any unlawful interference of the prison authorities with prisoners’ correspondence.
1) Legislative measures: To comply with the Convention’s standards concerning correspondence in prison, the Law on Enforcement of Criminal Sanctions was amended on 11/09/2009 after the events at the origin of these cases. Article 75 of the amended law guarantees prisoners an unlimited right to correspondence. This right may be limited only by a decision of a court. On 20/10/2005, before the law was changed, the Directorate for Enforcement of Prison Sanctions asked all prisons in the country in writing not to open prisoners’ letters and to respect their right to correspondence.
2) Publication and dissemination: The Court’s judgment in the Stojanović case has been translated into Serbian and published in the Official Gazette (No. 54/2009) as well as on the website of the Government Agent (). The Government Agent forwarded the judgment to the Ministry of Justice requesting its distribution to all prison authorities in the country. He also published an expert comment regarding this judgment in the legal journal, Paragraf.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that no individual measure is required and that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that Serbia has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 8 June 2011 at the 1115th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy