CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 19 février 2026
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2026:0219DEC004626719
- Date
- 19 février 2026
- Publication
- 19 février 2026
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
IAFaits
Un individu a saisi la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme (CEDH) contre la République d'Azerbaïdjan en vertu de l'article 34 de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme, invoquant des violations des articles 6 et 10 de la Convention concernant une condamnation administrative pour une vidéo publiée sur les réseaux sociaux. Le requérant était représenté par un avocat. Les griefs ont été communiqués au gouvernement azerbaïdjanais. Les parties ont signé des déclarations de règlement amiable prévoyant le versement d'une somme par le gouvernement au requérant, sous réserve de l'acceptation de renonciation à toute réclamation ultérieure.
Procédure
La CEDH, siégeant en comité, a examiné l'application. Les parties ont produit des déclarations formelles de règlement amiable. La Cour a pris acte du règlement amiable et a vérifié qu'il respectait les droits garantis par la Convention. Aucune raison n'a justifié la poursuite de l'examen de l'application.
Question juridique
La Cour européenne des droits de l'homme peut-elle poursuivre l'examen d'une application lorsque les parties ont conclu un règlement amiable respectant les droits garantis par la Convention ?
Solution
source officielleTexte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s6EC6BA2A { width:121.74pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sE3DA80B3 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 46267/19 Agil HUMMATOV against Azerbaijan (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 19   February 2026 as a Committee composed of:   Diana Kovatcheva , President ,   Canòlic Mingorance Cairat,   Vasilka Sancin , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application against the Republic of Azerbaijan lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 24   August 2019, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table. The applicant was represented by Mr Y. Imanov, a lawyer practising in Azerbaijan. The applicant’s complaints under Articles 6 and 10 of the Convention concerning his administrative conviction for a video he had published on social media were communicated to the Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”). The Court received the friendly-settlement declarations, signed by the parties, under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Azerbaijan in respect of the facts giving rise to this application, subject to an undertaking by the Government to pay him the amounts detailed in the appended table. These amounts will be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above ‑ mentioned three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on them, from the 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 LAW The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application. 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 in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 12 March 2026.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Diana Kovatcheva   Acting Deputy Registrar   President       APPENDIX Application raising complaints under Articles 6 and 10 of the Convention (administrative conviction for a video published on social media) Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth Representative’s name and location Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of Applicant’s declaration Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage (in euros) [1] Amount awarded for costs and expenses (in euros) [2] 46267/19 24/08/2019 Agil Valeh oglu HUMMATOV 1983   Yalchin IMANOV Sumgayit 18/12/2025 09/12/2025 2,600 500 (to be paid directly to the bank account of the representative)   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant. [2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
- Formation
- 27
- Date
- 19 février 2026
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2026:0219DEC004626719
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral