CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 14 mars 2024

.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 } .sA8507A40 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s944BDE53 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt } .sCEF2C954 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } Resolution CM/ResDH(2024)47 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Four cases against Poland   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 14 March 2024 at the 1492 nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 51246/17 D.A. AND OTHERS 08/07/2021 22/11/2021 41764/17 T.Z. AND OTHERS 13/10/2022 13/10/2022 42907/17 A.B. AND OTHERS 30/06/2022 14/11/2022 39028/17 A.I. AND OTHERS 30/06/2022 14/11/2022   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 refusal to receive the applicants’ asylum applications and the collective expulsion of the applicants to Belarus with a risk of refoulement to and ill-treatment in the country of origin, without an effective remedy with a suspensive effect, and in non-compliance with interim measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court in the cases of D.A. and Others and A.B. and Others (violations of Article 3, Article 4 of Protocol 4, Article 13 and Article 34 of the Convention);   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 information 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(2024)68-rev );   Considering that the question of individual measures was resolved, given the assurances provided by the authorities to the applicants in the cases D.A. and Others and A.B. and Others that should the applicants decide to re-apply for international protection and   present themselves at the Polish border checkpoint in the future, they will be treated in compliance with the requirements of the Court’s judgment in the   M.K. and Others case and the fact that no such assurances are necessary for the applicants in the cases T.Z. and Others and A.I. and Others ;     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 M.K. and Others case also in the light of the Court’s findings in these cases, and that the closure of these cases therefore in no way prejudges the Committee’s evaluation of the general measures in relation to the problem of non-acceptance of asylum applications and refusing entry to foreigners entering Poland from Belarus;   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases;   CONCLUDES that the necessary individual measures have been adopted;   DECIDES to continue to supervise the adoption of the necessary general measures in the case M.K. and Others ;   DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.