CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 13 décembre 2011

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s507451D6 { width:4.53pt; display:inline-block } .s299839C6 { width:212.77pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 21672/05 Vidadi SULTANOV against Azerbaijan The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 13   December 2011 as a Chamber composed of:   Nina Vajić, President,   Elisabeth Steiner,   Khanlar Hajiyev,   Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,   Julia Laffranque,   Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos,   Erik Møse, judges, and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 June 2005, Having regard to the observations submitted by the parties, Having regard to the parties’ declarations concerning a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Vidadi Sultanov, was an Azerbaijani national who was born in 1965 and lived in Baku. He was represented before the Court by Mr   I.   Aliyev and Ms N.   Huseynova, lawyers practising in Azerbaijan. On 6   October 2011 the applicant’s representative, Ms N. Huseynova, informed the Court that the applicant had died in the course of the proceedings before the Court (see below). The Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Ç.   Asgarov. The applicant alleged, in particular, that he had been ill-treated in police custody, that there had been a number of defects in the criminal proceedings against him, resulting in a violation of his right to a fair trial, and that his rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly with others had been infringed. On 7 September 2011 the Government submitted a friendly settlement proposal, enclosed with a letter signed by the Government Agent, which read as follows: “1.     In the light of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan (... nos. 35485/05, 45553/05, 35680/05 and 36085/05, 26 July 2011) the Government of the Republic of Azerbaijan offer to pay EUR 6,000 (six thousand euros) to the applicant, Mr Vidadi Sultanov, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application registered under no. 21672/05. This sum shall cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, and it will be payable within three months starting from the notification of the judgment delivered by the Court pursuant to Article 39 of the Convention for the protection of Humant Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This payment will consitute the final resolution of the case. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three ‑ month period, the Government undertake to pay, until settlement, simple interest on the amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. 2.     This declaration does not entail any acknlowledgment by the Government of a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights in the present case. 3.     The Government further undertake not to request the referral of the case to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the Convention.” On 9 September 2011 this proposal was forwarded to the applicant for comments. On 6 October 2011 the applicant’s representative submitted the following statement: “I regret to inform you that the applicant, Vidadi Sultanov, died a few years ago at the age of 42. On behalf of his widow Tarana Sultanova I kindly ask you to consider her as a legal heir of the applicant. On behalf of Mrs Sultanova, I take this opportunity to inform you that Mr   Sultanov’s ill-treatment had [led to deterioration of] his health and, therefore, his early decease could have been the result of the ill-treatment which he underwent in detention. ... Currently, Mr Sultanov’s widow, Tarana Sultanova, is taking care of their two underage children ... Taking into account the above considerations and the amount of compensation for non-pecuniary damage in the case of Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan , to which the Government of Azerbaijan refers in its proposal for a friendly settlement, the applicant’s widow proposes that the Government pay at least the same amount in compensation (ten thousand euros) for non-pecuniary damage, and waives the right to request compensation for any pecuniary damage in this case. Therefore, I kindly ask you to accept Mrs Sultanova as a legal heir of the applicant and to advise the Government of Azerbaijan to amend its proposal for a friendly settlement by increasing the amount of compensation to ten thousand euros, which would be a reasonable compensation in the light of ... Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan .” On 20 October 2011 the applicant’s wife’s and representative’s comments on the Government’s proposal and their counter-proposal were forwarded to the Government for comments. By a letter of 15 November 2011 signed by the their Agent, the Government submitted the following: “With reference to your letter of 20 October 2011, I inform you that the Government is ready to accept the proposal on friendly settlement by the applicant’s wife.” THE LAW The Court must first examine whether Mrs Tarana Sultanova has standing to pursue the application originally lodged by the applicant, Mr   Vidadi Sultanov, who died in the course of the proceedings before the Court. Mrs Tarana Sultanova declared that she wished to pursue the application before the Court. In various cases in which an applicant has died in the course of the proceedings the Court has taken into account the statements of the applicant’s heirs or of close members of his family who have expressed the wish to pursue the proceedings before the Court (see, for example, Deweer v. Belgium , 27 February 1980, §§   37-38, Series A no. 35; Vocaturo v. Italy , 24 May 1991, § 2, Series A no. 206 ‑ C; and Malhous v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 33071/96, ECHR 2000-XII). Regard being had to the fact that Mrs Tarana Sultanova, as the applicant’s widow, belongs to his next of kin and is his lawful heir under national law, the Court will continue to examine the application at her request. Having regard to the parties’ correspondence cited above, the Court notes that the applicant’s wife accepted the Government’s friendly settlement proposal, on the condition that the amount of compensation be increased to 10,000 euros (EUR). The Government accepted this condition. Accordingly, the parties reached an agreement under which the applicant’s wife agreed to waive any further claims against Azerbaijan in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay her EUR 10,000 to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case. The Court is satisfied that the friendly settlement reached between the parties is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Søren Nielsen   Nina Vajić   Registrar   President