CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 17 novembre 2015

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .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 } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sCA654B4E { font-size:6pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s33510801 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; widows:0; orphans:0 } .sA0611542 { color:#000000 } .sA8507A40 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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(2015)214 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Kalanyos and Others and Gergely against Romania   Application Nos. Case Judgment of Final on 57884/00 KALANYOS AND OTHERS 26/04/2007 26/07/2007 57885/00 GERGELY 26/04/2007 26/07/2007   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 November 2015 at the 1240th 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;   Recalling that the applicants’ admissible complaints in these cases concerned the consequences of racially-motivated violence, between 1990 and 1993, against villagers of Roma [1] origin, in particular improper living conditions following the destruction of their homes and the subsequent proceedings before the domestic courts (complaints under Articles 3, 6 § 1, 8, 13, and 14 of the Convention);   Recalling that the European Court gave judgments endorsing unilateral declarations by which the Romanian Government accepted that the events at issue had given rise to violations of Articles 3, 6 § 1, 8, 13, and 14 of the Convention and undertook to pay each of the applicants certain sums in compensation as well as costs and expenses; that it also undertook to adopt several general measures to fight discrimination against the Roma in the county concerned, to stimulate their participation in the economic, social, educational, cultural and political life of the local community, to support positive changes in public opinion in their respect, as well as to prevent and solve conflicts likely to generate violence;   Noting that in its judgments the Court decided, unanimously, to strike the cases out of the list since the requirements for the application of Article 37 paragraph 1 (c) of the Convention were met in the present cases, and that no other particular consideration related to respect for the human rights guaranteed in the Convention justified pursuit of the application under Article 37, paragraph 1 in fine ;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgments, having regard to its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention to abide by it;   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 sums provided for in the judgments (see document DH-DD(2015)864 );   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention with respect to the commitments subscribed to in these cases and   DECIDES to close the examination thereof. [1] The terms “Roma and Travellers” are being used at the Council of Europe to encompass the wide diversity of the groups covered by the work of the Council of Europe in this field: on the one hand a) Roma, Sinti/Manush, Calé, Kaale, Romanichals, Boyash/Rudari; b) Balkan Egyptians (Egyptians and Ashkali); c) Eastern groups (Dom, Lom and Abdal); and, on the other hand, groups such as Travellers, Yenish, and the populations designated under the administrative term “Gens du voyage”, as well as persons who identify themselves as Gypsies.