CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 12 mars 2015

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s86A03557 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; widows:0; orphans:0 } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .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 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; 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 } .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 } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sA8507A40 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s33510801 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; widows:0; orphans:0 } Resolution CM/ResDH(2015)44 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Four cases against Bulgaria   Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 50963/99 AL-NASHIF AND OTHERS 20/06/2002 20/09/2002 65028/01 BASHIR AND OTHERS 14/06/2007 14/09/2007 54323/00 HASAN 14/06/2007 14/09/2007 61259/00 MUSA AND OTHERS 11/01/2007 09/07/2007   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 12 March 2015 at the 1222nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     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”),   Having regard to the final judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee in these cases and to the violations established;   Recalling the respondent State’s obligation, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide 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 the above-mentioned obligation;   Having examined the action report 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 document DH-DD(2015)118 );   Having noted that, in respect of the general measures adopted, important steps have been made in the execution process, in particular through the introduction of different judicial remedies in response to the Court’s judgments;   Having noted that the outstanding questions related to the functioning of the remedies in the area of expulsion of foreigners based on national security considerations are entirely taken up in the cases from the C.G. and Others group which remain under the supervision of the Committee of Ministers;   Having noted, in addition, that the respondent State has committed itself to continue its efforts aimed at ensuring full and thorough execution of the judgments in the C.G. and Others group;   As concerns in particular the case of Musa and Others , while regretting the shortcomings of the judicial review carried out by the Supreme Administrative Court in 2008 and 2009, noted that no additional individual measure seems required in this case, because there is no longer a formal legal obstacle preventing the granting of a visa and the applicant has not contacted either the Committee or the authorities, since the expiration of the validity of the measures against him,   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.