CEDH · CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG — 9 juillet 1997

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                    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