CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 3 septembre 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 } .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 } .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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .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 } .s33510801 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; widows:0; orphans:0 } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s315AAACB { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sA8507A40 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sFAC29D8B { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; font-size:11pt } .s30AC1F85 { font-size:7.33pt; vertical-align:super } Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2020)180 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Gazsó group against Hungary   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 3 September 2020 at the 1377bis meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 48322/12 GAZSÓ GROUP (List of cases CM/Notes/1377bis/H46-14-app ) 16/07/2015 16/10/2015   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 considerable number of judgments of the Court finding violations of Article 6, paragraph 1, and in some of these judgments also violations of Article 13 of the Convention, due to the excessive length of civil, criminal and administrative proceedings and the lack of an effective remedy in this respect in Hungary;   Recalling Interim Resolutions CM/ResDH(2018)106 and CM/ResDH(2019)152 in which the Committee underlined in particular the scale of the problem and that excessive delays in the administration of justice constitute a serious danger for respect for the rule of law, resulting in a denial of human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Convention;   Recalling Recommendation   CM/Rec(2010)3 on effective remedies for excessive length of proceedings and stressing that the introduction of measures to address the excessive length of proceedings contributes, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, to enhancing the protection of human rights in member States and preserving the effectiveness of the Convention system, including by helping to reduce the number of applications to the Court;   Reiterating its deepest concern that the deadline set by the Court in the Gazsó pilot judgment expired more than three and a half years ago without any tangible progress having been presented by the authorities to date, and noting that Hungary is one of the very few remaining member States faced with the issue of excessively lengthy judicial proceedings which has not yet introduced an effective remedy in this respect;   Recalling with concern that the authorities have not yet provided information capable of demonstrating the impact of the reforms of the Codes of civil, administrative and criminal procedures on the length of judicial proceedings;   Recalling further that in autumn 2019 the authorities announced that, rather than continuing with the adoption of an existing draft law covering all types of judicial procedures and put on hold in November 2018, they would instead develop a new concept for a compensatory remedy limited, in the first phase, to criminal proceedings, which they undertook to present to the Committee before the end of December 2019;   Bearing in mind that, at its December 2019 Human Rights meeting, the Committee invited the authorities to present that concept in line with their calendar but emphasised their obligations also concerning civil cases and invited them to provide a concrete plan for the legislative process leading to the adoption of a remedy (or a combination of remedies) covering all types of judicial proceedings;   Noting with profound disappointment that, despite their own undertakings and the Committee’s urgings already expressed in two interim resolutions and a number of decisions, most recently in March 2020, the authorities have not submitted any kind of information that would allow the Committee to consider that progress has been made;   Emphasising the legal obligation of every State, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the final judgments of the European Court in any case to which they are a party, fully, effectively and promptly;   STRESSED that a firm commitment from the highest levels in the respondent State to implementing the European Court’s pilot judgment, is expected in order to put an end to the current stalemate;   STRONGLY EXHORTED, therefore, the authorities to draw on the principles contained notably in Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)3 on effective remedies for excessive length of proceedings and to provide, without further delay, a concrete legislative proposal for a compensatory remedy in respect of all or certain types of cases; a concrete plan for the adoption of a remedy (or a combination of remedies) covering all types of judicial proceedings and up-to-date statistical information on the length of proceedings before all courts, as well as on the discernible trends, allowing the Committee to assess the impact of the 2018 procedural reforms and on any other measures envisaged or taken;   DECIDED to resume examination of this group of cases at their 1390 th meeting (December 2020) (DH) at the latest.