CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 27 février 2019

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s829ABBD9 { border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-top:11.35pt; padding-bottom:10.98pt; vertical-align:middle } .s598389FB { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s2D33099A { font-size:7.33pt; font-style:italic; vertical-align:super } .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 } .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 } .s421F9159 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super } .s2C087B1C { font-style:italic; letter-spacing:0.5pt } .s448DDAED { letter-spacing:0.5pt } .sF355FB04 { font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:0.5pt } .s5097451B { font-weight:bold; letter-spacing:0.5pt } .s3985515B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s944BDE53 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt } Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)44 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights 17 cases against Bulgaria   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 27 February 2019 at the 1338 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 34805/02 ANGELOV ANGEL VASKOV 25/03/2010 25/06/2010 51284/09 ANZHELO GEORGIEV AND OTHERS 30/09/2014 30/12/2014 69138/01 BOYKO IVANOV 22/07/2008 22/10/2008 18059/05 DIMITAR DIMITROV 03/04/2012 03/07/2012 31365/02 DIMITROV GEORGI 15/01/2009 15/04/2009 61275/00 GEORGIEV VLADIMIR 16/10/2008 16/01/2009 53121/99 ILIEV STEFAN 10/05/2007 10/08/2007 55061/00 KAZAKOVA 22/06/2006 22/09/2006 50222/99 KRASTANOV 30/09/2004 30/12/2004 7888/03 NIKOLOVA AND VELICHKOVA 20/12/2007 20/03/2008 46317/99 OGNYANOVA AND CHOBAN 23/02/2006 23/05/2006 57883/00 PETROV VASIL 31/07/2008 31/10/2008 47905/99 RASHID 18/01/2006 18/04/2006 14383/03 SASHOV AND OTHERS 07/01/2010 07/04/2010 42027/98 TOTEVA 19/05/2004 19/08/2004 48130/99 VASILEV IVAN 12/04/2007 12/07/2007 43531/08 VELEV 16/04/2013 16/07/2013   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 concerning death or ill-treatment under the responsibility of law-enforcement agencies, ineffective investigation into these abuses and/or lack of an effective domestic remedy (violations of Articles 2, 3 and 13), as well as the unlawful detention of the applicants’ son in the case of Ognyanova and Choban , the infringement in the Rashid case of the applicant’s right to be brought before a judge after his detention on remand was ordered and to be released rapidly after the payment of bail, the excessive length of certain civil proceedings in the case of Krastanov , and the excessive length of criminal proceedings in the Vasil Petrov case (violations of Article 5, paragraphs 1 and 3 and of Article 6, paragraph   1);   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 plan provided by the government indicating the individual measures adopted 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(2016)847 );   Recalling that, in view of the information submitted, the Committee considered at the 1265 th meeting that no further individual measure was required in these cases;   Recalling that the question of general measures required in response to the shortcomings found by the Court in the present judgments continues to be examined within the framework of the Velikova group of cases and in the S.Z . / Kolevi group of cases and that the closure of these cases therefore in no way prejudges the Committee’s evaluation of the general measures required to prevent ill-treatment under the responsibility of law-enforcement agencies and to ensure effective investigations into such abuses and domestic remedies;   Noting that the questions raised by the violations of Article 5 in the cases of Ognyanova and Choban and Rashid were examined in a number of cases in which supervision has been closed, in particular Assenov and Others ( ResDH(2000)109 ), Nikolov and Shishkov ( CM/ResDH(2007)158 ), Yankov ( CM/ResDH(2013)102 ) , Evgeni Ivanov ( CM/ResDH(2012)164 ) and Bochev ( CM/ResDH(2017)382 );   Noting that the questions related to the excessive length of civil proceedings before the Sofia courts raised in the Krastanov case are examined in the context of the Svetozar Petrov case;   Noting that the questions related to the excessive length of criminal proceedings due to delays at the investigation stage, raised in the Vasil Petrov case, were examined in the context of the Kitov group of cases in which supervision has been closed ( CM/ResDH(2017)420 );   Noting that the questions raised by the shortcomings of investigations concerning officers from special police units in the Krastanov case is examined in the context of the Hristovi case in the Velikova group;   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases as regards the individual measures and   DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.