CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 6 décembre 2012

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s5EE9E87A { font-size:6.67pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .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 } .s2268F842 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:10pt } .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 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .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 } .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 } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-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 } .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 } .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 } .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 } .s22F01CEB { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-18pt } .s37D58556 { width:14.67pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } Resolution CM/ResDH(2012)226 [1] 11 cases against Turkey Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights   Case Application Judgment of Final on MERAL 33446/02 27/11/2007 02/06/2008 AKGÜL 19728/02 17/7/2008 17/10/2008 ARAÇ 9907/02 23/09/2008 23/12/2008 EKMEKÇI AND OTHERS 2841/05+ 26/05/2009 26/08/2009 ERCİYAS 10971/05 27/09/2011 27/12/2011 HASIRCI 38012/03 24/03/2009 06/07/2009 KARADUMAN AND TANDOĞAN 41296/04 03/06/2008 17/09/2008 KÖKSAL AND DURDU 27080/08+ 15/06/2010 15/09/2010 POSLU AND OTHERS 6162/04 08/06/2010 08/09/2010 TUKSAL AND OTHERS 57711/08+ 21/09/2010 21/12/2010 YILMAZ MELEK SIMA 37829/05 30/09/2008 06/04/2009   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),   Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concern the unfairness of domestic proceedings due to the failure by courts to provide the applicants with a copy of the written opinion of Public Prosecutor before the Council of State and the excessive length of domestic proceedings (in the cases of Köksal and Durdu (27080/08), Erciyas (10971/05) and Ekmekçi (2841/05)) (violations of article 6, paragraph 1);   Recalling that the respondent State’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide to by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:   -           of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and -           of general measures preventing similar violations;   Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its above-mentioned obligation;   Having examined the action reports provided by the government indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgments including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see documents DH-DD(2012)765E and DH-DD(2012)893E );   Noting that the necessary general measures concerning the excessive length of domestic proceedings in Köksal and Durdu (27080/08), Erciyas (10971/05) and Ekmekçi (2841/05) cases, are being examined in the context of Ormancı group of cases and Ümmühan Kaplan pilot judgment (24240/07) and that the domestic proceedings in these cases are terminated;   Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted;   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and   DECIDES to close the examination thereof.   [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 December 2012 at the 1157th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.