Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)20[1]
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Urbino Rodrigues & Roseiro Bento against Portugal
(Application No. 75088/01, judgment of 29 November 2005, final on 1 March 2006
Application No. 29288/02, judgment of 18 April 2006, final on 18 July 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 judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;
Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concerned disproportionate interference with the freedom of expression of the applicants, due to their conviction for defamation, following publication of a response to highly polemical remarks published by another journalist concerning an article by the applicant (case Urbino Rodrigues) and insults in the course of a debate in a municipal council (case Roseiro Bento) (violations of article 10) (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;
Having satisfied itself that the respondent state paid the applicants the just satisfaction provided in the judgments (see details in Appendix),
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(2010)20
Information on the measures taken to comply with the judgments in the cases of
Urbino Rodrigues & Roseiro Bento against Portugal
Introductory case summary
These cases concern disproportionate interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression due to their conviction for defamation (violations of Article 10). In the Urbino Rodrigues case, the applicant was a journalist convicted in 2000 of criminal libel and sentenced a fine, following publication of his response to highly polemical remarks published by another journalist concerning an article of the applicant. In the Roseiro Bento case, the applicant, at that time mayor of Vagos, was sentenced in 2001 to pay damages claimed by a political opponent for insults in the course of a debate in the municipal council.
I.Payments of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Name and application number
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
Urbino Rodrigues 75088/01
1 900 EUR
-
-
1 900 EUR
Paid on 18/05/2006
Roseiro Bento 29288/02
1 000 EUR
-
7 500 EUR
8 500 EUR
Paid on 09/11/2006
b) Individual measures
The amount of fines and damages paid by the applicants as a result of their conviction have been included in the just satisfaction awarded by the European Court. Furthermore, the applicant’s conviction in the Urbino Rodrigues case is no longer mentioned in his criminal record.
II.General measures
These cases present similarities with the Lopes Gomes da Silva case (closed by final Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)131, adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 31 October 2007 at the 1007th meeting of the Minsters’ Deputies).
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures adopted will prevent new, similar violations and that Portugal has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 March 2010 at the 1078th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy