The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32
(art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),
Having regard to the report drawn up by the European
Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31)
of the Convention relating to the above applications, which were
lodged between 27 January and 1 October 1987 by Mr James Clinton,
Mr Sean Simpson, Mr Sean Maguire, Mr Patrick McGeown,
Mr John Murray, Mr Philip Campbell, Mr Kieran Smyth,
Mr Guy Breslin, Mr John Connolly, Mr Sean McGuinness,
Mr L., Mr M. and Mr N. against the United Kingdom (Applications
Nos. 12690/87; 12731/87; 12823/87; 12900/87; 13032/87; 13033/87;
13246/87; 13231/87; 13232/87; 13233/87; 13310/87; 13553/88;
13555/88);
Whereas on 5 December 1991 the Commission transmitted the said
report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of
three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1),
of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought
before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of
Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention;
Whereas in their applications, as declared admissible by the
Commission on 31 May 1991, the applicants complained that their
arrest and detention under section 11 of the Northern Ireland
Emergency Provisions Act 1978 were in breach of Article 5,
paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), of the Convention; the seventh applicant
further complained that he was not informed promptly of the reasons
for his arrest contrary to Article 5, paragraph 2 (art. 5-2), of
the Convention; the first seven applicants also complained that in
violation of Article 5, paragraph 5 (art. 5-5), they had no
enforceable right to compensation under Northern Ireland law for
their Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), claim;
Whereas in its report adopted on 14 October 1991, the
Commission expressed by seven votes to two the opinion that there
had been a violation of Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), of the
Convention; unanimously that there had been a violation of
Article 5, paragraph 2 (art. 5-2), of the Convention in the case of
Kieran Smyth, the seventh applicant; by seven votes to two that
there had been a violation of Article 5, paragraph 5 (art. 5-5), of
the Convention in the cases of the first seven applicants;
Whereas, at the 473rd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, held
on 2 April 1992, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the
opinion expressed by the Commission, held, having voted in
accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1
(art. 32-1), of the Convention, that there had been in this case a
violation of Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), of the Convention
in all the above-mentioned cases; a violation of Article 5,
paragraph 2 (art. 5-2), of the Convention in the case of
Mr Kieran Smyth, the seventh applicant; and a violation of
Article 5, paragraph 5 (art. 5-5), in the cases of the first seven
applicants;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals made
by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards just
satisfaction to be awarded to the applicants;
Whereas at the same meeting, the Committee of Ministers
authorised direct negotiations between the Government of the United
Kingdom and the applicants with regard to the just satisfaction to
be awarded, limited to the payment of costs and expenses;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government of
the United Kingdom to inform it of the measures taken following its
decision of 2 April 1992, having regard to the United Kingdom's
obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the
Convention to abide by it, and of the outcome of the negotiations
authorised with the applicants;
Whereas the Government of the United Kingdom subsequently
informed the Committee of Ministers that agreements had been
reached between the parties according to which seven of the
applicants, that is Mr Clinton, Mr Simpson, Mr Maguire, Mr McGeown,
Mr Murray, Mr Campbell and Mr Smyth, would receive, jointly, the
sum of 4 157 pounds sterling for costs and expenses and the
remaining six applicants, that is Mr Breslin, Mr Connolly,
Mr McGuinness, Mr L., Mr M., and Mr N., would receive, jointly, the
sum of 4 553,12 pounds sterling for costs and expenses;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that in
conformity with the agreements reached on 30 March and
29 September 1994 respectively the Government of the United Kingdom
paid the sums agreed to the applicants in respect of costs and expenses;
Whereas the Government of the United Kingdom informed the
Committee of Minsters that the measures taken in response to the
judgment of the Court in the case of Fox, Campbell and Hartley
(see Resolution DH (91) 39) would prevent the repetition also of
the violations found by the Committee of Ministers in the present
case,
Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the
Government of the United Kingdom, that it has exercised its
functions under Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention in this
case;
Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the
Commission in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy