CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 25 septembre 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 } .s3985515B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s944BDE53 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt } Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)235 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Three cases against Bulgaria   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 25 September 2019 at the 1355 th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)   Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 41452/07 LENEV 04/12/2012 04/03/2013 2747/02 VACHKOVI 08/07/2010 08/10/2010 39651/11 POPOVI 09/06/2016 09/09/2016   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 on account of death, torture or ill-treatment during arrest, due to unjustified use of firearms or force by members of the law enforcement agencies and the lack of effective investigation (violations of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention), as well as the lack of an effective compensatory remedy for ill-treatment, breaches of the presumption of innocence and the lack of an effective remedy in this respect, unlawful potential placing under secret surveillance and lack of an effective remedy in this respect, unlawful searches and lack of an effective remedy in this respect, and unlawful divulgation to the media of a footage of an arrest and the lack of effective remedy in this respect (violations of Articles 3, 6   §   2, 8 and 13);   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 plans provided by the government indicating the individual 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(2016)847 , DH-DD(2017)344-add2 and DH-DD(2019)808 );   Considering that no further individual measures are possible in these cases, given that the prescription of the criminal proceedings in the Lenev and Popovi cases concerning the applicants’ torture or ill-treatment was established by the Prosecutor’s Office and that the first applicant in the Popovi case has been acquitted and the seized items were returned to him and given also that in the Vachkovi case the termination of the new investigation was confirmed by the competent courts which noted also the impossibility to carry out some investigative acts due to initial deficiencies of the investigation;     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 secure effective investigations into such abuses and domestic remedies;   Noting that the questions raised by the violation of Article 2 in the Vachkovi case related to the disproportionate use of firearms have been examined in the context of several cases from the Nachova group ( CM/ResDH(2016)274 );   Noting that the questions raised by the violation of Article 6 § 2 in the Popovi case have been examined in the Toni Kostadinov case (Final Resolution CM/ResDH(2016)336 ) and are also raised in judgments examined in the Gutsanovi group of cases;   Noting that the questions raised by the violation of Article 13 taken together with Article 6 § 2 concerning the lack of effective remedy in respect of breaches of the presumption of innocence raised by the Popovi case are being examined in the Petrov and Ivanova case;   Noting that the questions raised by the violations of Articles 8 and 13 related to the unlawful searches in the Popovi case and the lack of an effective remedy are being examined in the Peev and Iliya Stefanov group of cases;   Noting that the questions raised by the violations of Articles 8 and 13 in the Lenev case related to unlawful potential secret surveillance are being examined in the Association for European Law and Human Rights and Ekimdzhiev group of cases;   Noting that the questions raised by the violation of Article 8 in the Popovi case related to unlawful divulgation of a footage of an arrest to the media and the lack of effective remedy are being examined in the context of the Alexey Petrov case;   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.