Resolution ResDH(2004)78
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 2 October 2001 (final on 2 January 2002)
in the case of Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden against Bulgaria
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 December 2004
at the 906th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden, delivered on 2 October 2001 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in two applications (No. 29221/95 and 29225/95) against Bulgaria, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 29 July 1994 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Boris Stankov, a Bulgarian national, and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden, and that the Commission declared admissible their complaint concerning a breach of their right to freedom of opinion due to the prohibition by the Bulgarian authorities of a number of commemorative meetings planned by the applicants between 1994 and 1997;
Whereas in its judgment of 2 October 2001 the Court:
- rejected the Government's preliminary objection;
- dismissed, unanimously the Government's preliminary objections;
- held, by six votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 11 of the Convention;
- held, by six votes to one, that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicants, within three months from the date on which the judgment became final, 40 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage;
- held, unanimously, that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicants, within three months from the date on which the judgment became final, 36 127 French francs in respect of costs and expenses, plus any amount due in respect of VAT;
- held, unanimously, that simple interest at an annual rate of 4.26% would be payable on those sums from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
- dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the applicants' claim for just satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 2 October 2001, having regard to Bulgaria's obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state gave the Committee information about the measures taken in order to put an end to the violation found and to prevent new violations of the same kind as that found in the present judgment (this information appears in the appendix to this resolution);
Having satisfied itself that on 2 April 2002, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment of 2 October 2001,
Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of Bulgaria, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2004)78
Information provided by the Government of Bulgaria
during the examination of the case of Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden
by the Committee of Ministers
With regard to individual measures, since 2001 the applicants have no longer been prevented from holding their commemorative meetings. The Bulgarian authorities have thus put an end to the violation found by the Court.
The Government recalled that according to Article 5, paragraph 4 of the Bulgarian Constitution, the European Convention on Human Rights, ratified by Bulgaria on 7 September 1992, is part of the domestic legal order and its provisions take priority over provisions of domestic legislation. Several examples of national courts' decisions were submitted to the Committee of Ministers to show the development of the direct effect of the Convention and of the case-law of the European Court at national level, and in particular of judgments concerning Bulgaria directly.
Thus, following the judgments in the cases of Assenov (28 October 1998) and Nikolova (25 March 1999), national courts began directly to apply the Convention law with respect to grounds and length of pre-trial detention (e.g. decisions of Plovdiv Regional Court No. 1558/2001 and No. 1515/2001, of Bourgas District Court No. 285/2002 and No. 559/2002, of Sofia Regional Court Nno. 4306/2001).
This development has been strengthened following the Al-Nashif judgment (of 20 June 2002). In this case the Supreme Administrative Court decided to reopen the domestic proceedings impugned by the European Court and indicated to national courts that they must apply the European Convention directly, as interpreted by the Strasbourg Court (decisions of 8 and 12 May 2003). Moreover, domestic courts in general apply the case-law of the European Court, inter alia concerning freedom of expression (e.g. decisions of the Sofia Regional Court No. 2082/2000 and 10154/2000 concerning prosecution of journalists for libel and slander).
The Government considers that the direct effect of the case-law of the European Court, which is starting to be recognised in increasingly varied fields, will in the future prevent new violations similar to that found in the present case, in particular by ensuring that the Law on Meetings and Marches of 1990, in particular its Article 12, which regulates the prohibition of certain meetings and the right to effective access to courts in case of refusal by mayors to authorise meetings, is interpreted in conformity with the requirements of the European Convention.
With a view to facilitating this development, the Deputy Minister of Justice sent the judgment of the European Court, translated into Bulgarian and accompanied by a circular letter, to the mayors of the towns of Petrich and Sandanski, directly concerned by this case. Moreover, in order to inform the courts and the public of the new interpretation of the law, which is binding, the Ministry of Justice published the judgment of the Court, in Bulgarian, on its Internet site: .
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy