EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
FIRST CHAMBER
Application No. 27496/95
M. M.
against
Bulgaria
REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
(adopted on 9 July 1997)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
PART I : STATEMENT OF THE FACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
PART II : SOLUTION REACHED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
INTRODUCTION
1. This Report relates to the application introduced under
Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by M.M. against Bulgaria on
28 March 1995. It was registered on 1 June 1995 under file
No. 27496/95.
2. The applicant was represented by Mrs. Zdravka Kalaydjieva, a
lawyer practising in Sofia.
3. The Government of Bulgaria were represented by
Mr. Ventzislav Ivanov, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
4. On 10 September 1996 the Commission (First Chamber) declared the
application admissible. It then proceeded to carry out its task under
Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:
"In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to
it:
a. it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake
together with the representatives of the parties an examination
of the petition and, if need be, an investigation, for the
effective conduct of which the States concerned shall furnish all
necessary facilities, after an exchange of views with the
Commission;
b. it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of
the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly
settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human Rights
as defined in this Convention."
5. The Commission (First Chamber) found that the parties had reached
a friendly settlement of the case and on 9 July 1997 it adopted this
Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention,
is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution
reached.
6. The following members were present when the Report was adopted:
Mrs. J. LIDDY, President
MM. M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
E. BUSUTTIL
A. WEITZEL
C.L. ROZAKIS
L. LOUCAIDES
B. MARXER
B. CONFORTI
N. BRATZA
I. BÉKÉS
G. RESS
A. PERENIC
C. BÎRSAN
K. HERNDL
M. VILA AMIGÓ
Mrs. M. HION
Mr. R. NICOLINI
PART I
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
7. The applicant is a Bulgarian citizen, born in 1964 and resident
in Sofia.
8. In the divorce proceedings between the applicant and her husband
the custody of their three years' old child was granted to the father.
The applicant's alleged involvement with the religious association
Warriors of Christ was discussed in these proceedings.
9. The judicial decisions also granted the applicant the right to
spend with her child every second Saturday and up to twenty days every
summer, but her former husband refused to allow any contact with the
child.
10. In 1994 the applicant instituted civil execution proceedings for
the enforcement of her former husband's obligation to allow contact
with the child. The efforts of the civil enforcement judge were
fruitless as under Section 421 of the Civil Procedure Code he could
only impose a fine of 200 leva, which had become a nominal amount due
to the inflation in the country.
11. On 22 March 1995 the applicant complained to the prosecution
authorities requesting the institution of criminal proceedings against
her former husband for having disobeyed the judicial order concerning
the contact with her son, an alleged crime under Section 182 of the
Criminal Code. This was refused by decisions of 21 September and
16 October 1995.
12. Before the Commission the applicant complained under Articles 8
and 14 of the Convention that the custody of her child was granted to
the father because of her involvement with an untraditional religious
society and also that she could not obtain execution of the judicial
order providing for contact with her child, after having resorted to
all possible means. The applicant also complained under Article 6
para. 1 of the Convention that the courts were partial and under
Articles 9 and 14 of the Convention that the judicial decisions on the
custody issue constituted an indirect coercion on her to change her
religious beliefs.
PART II
SOLUTION REACHED
13. Following the decision on the admissibility of the application,
the Commission (First Chamber) placed itself at the disposal of the
parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance
with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties
to submit any proposals they wished to make.
14. In accordance with the usual practice, the Chamber Secretary,
acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to
explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement. Meetings
between the Chamber Secretary, assisted by a member of the Commission's
Secretariat, and the parties took place in Sofia on 27 June 1997.
15. Following these meetings the Commission received the following
agreement signed by the representatives of both parties:
"1. The Government express their concern for the need for
effective enforcement of court decisions providing for contact
between a child and a non-custodial parent, as well as their
concern for the need of respect for human rights as guaranteed
by the European Convention on Human Rights as interpreted by the
Convention organs.
2. The Government through the Sofia law enforcement
authority shall address themselves to the Sofia District Court
with a view to the institution of ex officio proceedings under
Section 106 para. 5 of the Family Code in the applicant's case.
The foregoing shall in no way be interpreted as an interference
with the independence and impartiality of the Court.
3. The Government acknowledge that it is also open to
the applicant to institute proceedings under Section 106 para. 5
of the Family Code before the competent court and to refer to
the Commission's decision of 10 September 1995 declaring her
application inadmissible.
4. The Government undertake to draft, in consultation
with the applicant's representative, and submit to the National
Assembly a legislative proposal for the amendment of the
relevant provisions concerning the enforcement of judicial
decisions providing for personal contact between a child and a
non-custodial parent, with a view to guaranteeing enforceability
of such decisions.
5. In respect of the issue of non-pecuniary damages,
which could arise in such matters, the applicant agrees, in view
of the achieved settlement, not to claim such damages. Within
three months following the approval of this settlement the
Government shall pay to the applicant the sum of 7,000 FF. Upon
the payment of this amount, and taking into account the amount
already paid by the Council of Europe by way of legal aid, the
applicant's costs and expenses in the present case shall be
deemed fully reimbursed."
16. At its session on 9 July 1997, the Commission noted that the
parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.
It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the
Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured
on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.
17. For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.
M.F. BUQUICCHIO J. LIDDY
Secretary President
to the First Chamber of the First Chamber
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy