CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 5 mars 2020

.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 } .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 } .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 } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .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 } .s257F21AB { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:63.8pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-21.25pt } .sC96B8156 { width:15.14pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sEC2DD5D { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:42.55pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Resolution CM/ResDH(2020)44 Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights Ayvazyan against Armenia   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 5 March 2020 at the 1369 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 56717/08 AYVAZYAN 01/06/2017 13/11/2017   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 judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in this case and to the substantive and procedural violations of Article 2 of the Convention established on account of the planning and conduct of the police operation without sufficient consideration for the pre-eminence of the right to life and of the authorities’ failure to carry out an effective investigation into the circumstances of Seyran Ayvazyan’s death;   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 measures adopted to give effect to the judgment, including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2020)90 );   Considering that the question of individual measures has therefore been resolved, given that the new investigation, which found that that the used force was proportionate, has been closed and that no other individual measure is possible;   Recalling that the question of general measures required in response to the shortcomings found by the Court in the present judgment continues to be examined within the framework of the Virabyan group,   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case as regards the individual measures and   DECIDES to close the examination of this case.