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 judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the
Van Droogenbroeck case delivered on 24 June 1982 and 25 April 1983 and
transmitted the same days to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in an application against Belgium lodged with
the European Commission of Human Rights on 16 April 1977 under Article 25
(art. 25) of the Convention by Mr Valery Van Droogenbroeck, a Belgian national,
who complained that his detention as a recidivist placed at the government's
disposal, was not decided by a court with a view to order his release if the
detention was not lawful;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission
on 18 December 1980 and by the Government of Belgium on 5 January 1981;
Whereas in its judgment of 24 June 1982 the Court unanimously:
- held there had been no violation of Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1),
of the Convention;
- held that there had been a violation of Article 5, paragraph 4 (art. 5-4);
- held that there had been no violation of Article 4 (art. 4);
- held that the question of the application of Article 50 (art. 50) was
not ready for decision;
Whereas in its judgment of 25 April 1983 the Court unanimously held that Belgium
was to pay the applicant 20 000 Belgian francs for non-pecuniary damage;
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 Belgium to inform it of the measures which had
been taken in consequence of the judgments of 24 June 1982 and 25 April 1983,
having regard to its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to
abide by them;
Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the
Government of Belgium gave the Committee information about the measures taken in
consequence of the judgments, which information appears in the appendix to this
resolution;
Having satisfied itself that the Government of Belgium has paid the applicant
the sum provided for in the judgment of 25 April 1983,
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government
of Belgium, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of
the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution DH (90) 31
Information provided by the Government of Belgium
during the examination of the Van Droogenbroeck case
before the Committee of Ministers
An Act promulgated on 17 July 1990 and published on 9 August 1990 amended
Articles 25 and 26 of the Social Protection in respect of Mental Defectives and
Habitual Offenders Act of 1 July 1964.
According to Article 25 ter of the Act of 17 July 1990, a recidivist or an
habitual offender placed at the government's disposal and detained by virtue of
a reasoned decision of the Minister of Justice can appeal against the decision
before the chambre du conseil of the court which has decided his placement at
the government's disposal. The chambre du conseil verifies whether the
minister's decision is lawful and orders the release of the person concerned if
it is not.
Under Article 25 quater, after one year of deprivation of liberty ordered by the
minister according to Article 25 bis, the recidivist or habitual offender may
apply to the Minister of Justice in order to request his release. This request
may be renewed every year. The decision of the minister to refuse the request
can be appealed against before a court following the procedure provided for in
Article 25 ter of the Act.
According to Article 26 of the Act of 17 July 1990, recidivists or habitual
offenders placed at the government's disposal may request the King's Prosecutor
to put an end to the effects of that decision. Such a request may be brought
three or five years after the end of the penalty and may be renewed every three
or five years thereafter. This request is examined by the chambre du conseil
whose decision may be appealed against before the Chambre des mises en
accusations following the provisions of Article 26 bis of the Act of
17 July 1990.
The sum awarded by the Court to the applicant has been paid on 17 June 1983.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy