CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 5 décembre 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 } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA8507A40 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)327 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Six cases against Italy   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 5 December 2019 at the 1362 nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 36276/10 CIRILLO 29/01/2013 29/04/2013 73869/10 G.C. 22/04/2014 22/07/2014 50550/06 SCOPPOLA 10/06/2008 26/01/2009 7509/08 CONTRADA No. 2 11/02/2014 11/05/2014 2447/05 CARA-DAMIANI 07/02/2012 09/07/2012 65050/09 SCOPPOLA No. 4 17/07/2012 19/11/2012   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 of Article 3 of the Convention due to the inadequate medical care and treatment provided to the applicants while in detention or to their continuing imprisonment, notwithstanding the impossibility to provide them in prison with the medical care and treatment they required;   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(2018)1125 );   Noting, as regards individual measures, the information showing that the applicants in the cases of Cirillo and G.C ., who are still serving prison sentences, have received the necessary medical care and treatment and are now subject to an adequate medical follow-up; noting further that the other four applicants are no longer detained;   Welcoming, as regards general measures, the successful transfer of responsibilities for prison healthcare from the Ministry of Justice to the National Health Service and taking note of the authorities’ assessment that this allows prisoners to receive equivalent care to that available to the general population; noting also that the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment confirmed having gained an overall positive impression of the quality of primary healthcare provided to prisoners in its report following its latest periodic visit in Italy in 2016;   Noting moreover with interest that the Court of Cassation’s practice in cases where it is alleged that the health condition of prisoners is not compatible with their continuing detention has firmly incorporated the Convention requirements, as laid down in the Court’s case-law;   Recalling the establishment, in the context of the execution of the Torreggiani pilot judgment, of a combination of domestic judicial remedies, preventive and compensatory, offering redress in respect of complaints concerning poor conditions of detention including inadequate healthcare;   Recalling also the establishment of an independent authority responsible for monitoring the detention facilities and noting that prisoners can also lodge individual applications with this authority to complain about the conditions of their detention;   Expressing confidence that the authorities will maintain their efforts and commitment to providing adequate healthcare to prisoners, as required under the Convention, including by pursuing their cooperation with the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;   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.