CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 9 juin 2021

.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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s8A75A232 { font-weight:bold; color:#000000 } .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 } .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 } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .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 } Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2021)103 Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights Bell against Belgium   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 2021 at the 1406 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)   Application Case Judgment of Final on 44826/05 BELL 04/11/2008 06/04/2009   The Committee of Ministers, by virtue 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 referred to as “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Recalling that this case concerns the excessive length of civil proceedings before first instance Belgian tribunals and that this problem dates back to 2005;   Reiterating that excessive delays in the administration of justice constitute a serious danger, in particular for the respect of the rule of law and the access to justice, 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 aimed at combating this will contribute, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, to improving the protection of human rights in member States as well as preserving the effectiveness of the Convention system, including by helping to reduce the number of cases brought before the Court;   Expressing its deep concern at the persistent lack of comprehensive statistical data (relating to “clearance rate” and “disposition time”) on the first instance civil tribunals despite its explicit request to have it available by March 2021, which has for many years prevented the Committee from fully assessing the situation in those tribunals and the impact of the measures adopted to reduce their workload in particular;   URGED the authorities to devote all the necessary means to provide , by the end of June 2022 at the latest, complete data on the activity of first instance civil tribunals as well as information concerning the functioning in practice of the domestic compensation remedy (in particular, processing times, prescription and reparations granted) to complain about the excessive length of judicial proceedings;   ENCOURAGED, once again, the authorities to improve their judicial statistical information in a more general manner, through an increased digitisation of Justice and any other appropriate means, including, where appropriate, by recourse to the cooperation of the CEPEJ;   NOTED the intentions of the authorities to upgrade and strengthen the means available to the justice system and invited them to quickly concretise those intentions so that Belgian courts and tribunals can fully fulfil their missions under Article 6 of the Convention; regretting the absence of any new information as regards the model for internal allocations (AMAI) project put forward by the authorities for many years, reiterated its encouragement to the authorities to deploy all the necessary means, including statistics, to finalise without delay this model aiming, in the future, at a better distribution of financial and human resources between the courts and tribunals;   DECIDED to resume consideration of this case at its (DH) meeting of September 2022, at the latest