The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of
Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to
as "the Convention"),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of
Human Rights in the Eriksson case delivered on 22 June 1989 and
transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in an application
against Sweden lodged with the European Commission of Human
Rights on 7 December 1984 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the
Convention by Mrs Cecilia Eriksson, a Swedish national, acting
on behalf of herself and of her daughter Lisa, who complained
inter alia of prohibitions on removal of her daughter from her
foster home after public care had terminated and of restrictions
on their access to each other. The applicant also complained
that no court remedy was available to challenge these
restrictions on access;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by
the Commission on 13 September 1988 and by the Government of
Sweden on 8 November 1988;
Whereas in its judgment of 22 June 1989 the Court:
- held unanimously that the severe and lasting restrictions
on access imposed on the applicants without any basis in
domestic law, combined with the long duration of the
prohibition on removal, amounted to a violation of
Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention;
- held unanimously that the lack of a court remedy to
challenge the restrictions on access gave rise to a
violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the
Convention, as regards Cecilia Eriksson and, by fifteen
votes to five, as regards Lisa Eriksson;
- held unanimously that, as regards both applicants, it was
not necessary to examine this same point also under
Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention;
- held unanimously that there had been no other violations
of Article 6, paragraph l (art. 6-1);
- held unanimously that there had been no violation of
Cecilia Eriksson's rights under Article 2 of Protocol
No. l (P1-2), taken alone or together with Article 13
(art. 13+P1-2) of the Convention;
- held unanimously that Lisa Eriksson could not claim to
be a victim of the alleged violation of Article 2 of
Protocol No. l (P1-2), taken alone or together with
Article 13 (art. 13+P1-2) of the Convention;
- held unanimously that Sweden was to pay, for
non-pecuniary damage, 200 000 Swedish crowns to Cecilia
Eriksson and 100 000 Swedish crowns to her daughter Lisa
and, for legal costs and expenses, 100 000 Swedish crowns
to Cecilia Eriksson;
- rejected unanimously the remainder of the claim for just
satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of
Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of
the Convention;
Having invited the Government of Sweden to inform it of
the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment
of 22 June 1989, having regard to its obligation under
Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas, during the examination of the case by the
Committee of Ministers, the Government of Sweden gave the
Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of
the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this
resolution;
Having satisfied itself that the Government of Sweden has
paid the first applicant, on behalf of herself and of her
daughter, the sums provided for in the judgment,
Declares, after having taken note of the information
supplied by the Government of Sweden, that it has exercised its
functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this
case.
Appendix to Resolution DH (91) 14
Information provided by the Government of Sweden
during the examination of the Eriksson case
before the Committee of Ministers
According to the new act containing special provisions on the
care of young persons, which was enacted on 8 March 1990 and came
into force on 1 July 1990, any decision concerning prohibition
on removal will henceforth be taken by the Regional
Administrative Court upon an application from the competent
Social Council. Under section 26 of the act, decisions on
prohibition on removal will be reviewed by the Social Council at
least every three months. A temporary prohibition on removal may
be issued by the Social Council but must, according to section
34 of the act, be reviewed by the court within two weeks.
Under section 31 of the Aact, the parents' right of access to a
child subjected to a prohibition on removal will be decided by
the Social Council. Its decisions can, however, according to the
provisions of section 41, paragraph 5, of the act, be appealed
to the Regional Administrative Court. Furthermore, section 33
of the act provides that all questions relating to this act must
be decided speedily.
The sums awarded by the Court were paid by decision dated
27 July 1989.
As regards the first applicant's complaint that since the Court's
judgment she still has no effective access to her daughter Lisa,
the Government of Sweden wishes to recall that under Swedish law
(Chapter 21, sections 5 and 6 of the Parental Code) enforcement
of a court's decision concerning access cannot take place against
the wish of a child who has reached the age of twelve unless the
court finds it necessary in the best interest of the child.
In the present case, Lisa Eriksson reached the age of twelve on
24 February 1990, that is eight months after the Court's
judgment. The Swedish administrative courts have in current
proceedings found that the enforcement of existing decisions
concerning access would be contrary to Lisa Eriksson's own wish.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy