CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 4 décembre 2025

.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 } .s10027FC0 { margin-left:5.4pt; border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s9833E78A { height:12.2pt } .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 } .sD81AB0A7 { height:11.35pt } .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 } .s66053943 { text-transform:uppercase } .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 } .sA8507A40 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s3985515B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCEF2C954 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } Resolution CM/ResDH(2025)399 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Oleksandr Volkov against Ukraine   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 December 2025 at the 1545 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 21722/11 OLEKSANDR VOLKOV 09/01/2013 06/02/2018 27/05/2013 06/05/2018   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 this case and to the several violations of Article 6 paragraph 1 and Article 8 on account of the applicant’s dismissal from his post as judge of the Supreme Court. in June 2010;   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 submissions provided by the government, indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgments and having satisfied itself that the terms of the friendly settlement, covering pecuniary damage, were executed by the government of the respondent State (see documents DH-DD(2014)1279 , DH-DD(2015)27 , DH-DD(2019)714 );   Considering that the question of individual measures was resolved, given that the applicant was reinstated as judge of the Supreme Court in 2014, which was welcomed by the Committee (see document CM/Del/Dec(2015)1222/22 );   Noting, in respect of the general measures, that extensive progress has been achieved, as demonstrated by the functioning of the new framework governing the system of judicial career and discipline, which resulted from the 2016 constitutional amendments, the enactment of the Law on the Judiciary and Status of Judges and the Law on the High Council of Justice, as well as the subsequent legislative and institutional reforms carried out in co-operation and with extensive expert assistance of the Council of Europe;     Noting further that the remaining measures required in response to the shortcomings found by the Court in the Oleksandr Volkov case continue to be examined within the framework of the Denisov / Golovchuk group of cases also in the light of the Court’s findings in this case, and that the closure of this case therefore in no way prejudges the Committee’s evaluation of the outstanding general measures in relation to the independence and impartiality of the judiciary in the context of disciplinary proceedings and the implementation of the principle of irremovability of judges;   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case;   CONCLUDES that the necessary individual measures have been adopted and extensive progress has been achieved in respect of the general measures;   DECIDES to continue to supervise the adoption of the outstanding general measures concerning the independence and impartiality of the judiciary in the context of disciplinary proceedings and the implementation of the principle of irremovability of judges in the Denisov / Golovchuk group of cases;   DECIDES to close the examination of this case.