CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;FRA;FRE — 8 mars 2012

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s87C74EA6 { font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s23ADBB69 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s46C378D1 { margin-left:24.75pt; border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s976DE78A { height:12.8pt } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sD7287D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:9pt } .sA54E3CC5 { font-size:6pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s40B7A780 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s8BB6D734 { margin-right:9pt; margin-left:9pt; border-collapse:collapse; } .sF29177A6 { height:1pt } .sD02AAC4D { border-top:0.75pt solid #88888a; vertical-align:top } .s6A92063D { border-top:0.75pt solid #88888a; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; vertical-align:top } .s2CF8A31C { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; vertical-align:middle } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .s846B54EF { font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)40 [1] Exécution de l’arrêt de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme Tănase contre République de Moldova     Le Comité des Ministres, en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales, qui prévoit qu’il surveille l’exécution des arrêts définitifs de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (ci-après nommées «   la Convention   » et «   la Cour   ») [2] ,   Vu l’arrêt ci-dessous, qui a été transmis par la Cour au Comité une fois qu’il est devenu définitif   ;   Nom de l’affaire (n o requête) Arrêt du Définitif le Tănase (7/08) 27 avril 2010 Grande Chambre   Rappelant que les constats de violation faits par la Cour exigent, outre le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée dans les arrêts, l’adoption par l’Etat défendeur, si nécessaire, de mesures individuelles mettant fin aux violations et effaçant autant que possible les conséquences de celles-ci pour le requérant, et de mesures générales permettant de prévenir des violations semblables ;   Ayant invité les autorités de l’Etat défendeur à fournir un plan d’action concernant les mesures proposées pour exécuter l’arrêt;   Ayant examiné, conformément aux Règles du Comité pour l’application de l’article 46, paragraphe   2, de la Convention, le bilan d’action fourni par le gouvernement (voir bilan d’action, document DH-DD(2011)563 ) [3]   ;   Ayant noté que   l’Etat défendeur a versé à la partie requérante la satisfaction équitable prévue dans l’arrêt ;     DECLARE qu’il a rempli ses fonctions en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention dans cette affaire et   DECIDE d’en clore l’examen.     THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA REPORT/PLAN OF ACTIONS IN CASE OF TANASE v. MOLDOVA (Application no. 7/08), Judgment of 27 April 2011) by the Grand Chamber Final on 27 April 2010   Introductory case summary   Violation of the freedom of expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of legislature caused by the enacted law preventing elected MPs with multiple nationalities from taking seats in Parliament. Violation of Article 3 of Protocol 1   I. Individual measures   a) Payment Date and status: Only the compensation for costs and expenses in an amount of 8.881.83 EUR was awarded to the applicant. Finished: The amount of 8.881.83 EUR has been paid to the applicant on 13 July 2010.   b) Reopening of the domestic proceedings/ restitution in integrum   Date and status: It does not require such measures as reopening of the proceedings.   For restitutio in integrum see the general measures. -   II. General measures   a) Publication Date and measures   The judgment has been translated into Romanian and it is available on the official web page of the Ministry of Justice. Another publication is being prepared for the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova.     Finished Available from 27 May 2010   On-going b) Dissemination Date and measures   The full translated copy of’ the judgment had been forwarded to all concerned national authorities. It has been accompanied by the Governmental Agent’s comments on modalities of execution of the individual and general measures. It was disseminated between the MPs being attached on the draft laws on amending the legal framework.     The Supreme Council of Magistrates. The Supreme Court of Justice. The General Prosecutor’s Office.   The Constitutional Court The Parliament c) Other imposed measures   Date and status It was required to amend the framework laws on election of MPs with dual citizenship. Finished on 31 December 2009’   The provisions of Law no.273 that banned certain categories of public servants to hold dual citizenship, including elected MPs with multiple nationalities from taking seats in Parliament, was amended by the Law no. 127 of 23 December 2009 in force from 31 December 2009. Respectively, the bans were lifted for all categories of public servants.           CONCLUSIONS   The Government considers that the above-mentioned measures that have been implemented by the authorities lead to a conclusion that the issues found by the Court in the present case had been solved. The consequences on the applicant’s situation have been properly remediated and he was adequately redressed in his rights. It may be appropriate to consider that these measures have a deterrent effect and they would prevent occurrence of a similar situation(s) and violation(s). Consequently, the Government considers that they have fulfilled their obligation under Article 46 § 1 of the Convention and it is appropriate to strike the present case out from the lists of pending cases before the Committee of Ministers. For these reasons, the Government invites the Committee of Ministers to close their supervision process in the present case.   Chisinau. 29 July 2011 Lilian APOSTOL on behalf of the Agent for the Government of the Republic of Moldova   [1] Adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 8 mars 2012 lors de la 1136e réunion des Délégués des Ministres. [2] voir aussi les recommandations adoptées par le Comité des Ministres dans le cadre de la supervision des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, et en particulier la Recommandation   Rec(2004)6 du Comité des Ministres aux Etats membres sur l'amélioration des recours internes. [3] Document en anglais uniquement