CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 9 juin 1999

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s9BD1BAAD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:22pt; text-align:center } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sFCACDBC6 { margin-top:22pt; margin-bottom:10pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40283553 { margin-top:10pt; margin-bottom:8pt; text-align:center } .s55B2EA68 { margin-top:8pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; line-height:150% } .sD622F424 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:32pt; text-align:center } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5BB93D78 { margin-top:32pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:36pt } .s810C3978 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:36pt } .s48A8B0C6 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt } .sE0095B1E { width:36pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .s47E2B0C6 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     resolution DH   (99) 340 HUMAN RIGHTS APPLICATION No. 19103/91 BEGUE AGAINST FRANCE (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 1999 at the 672nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies) The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article   32 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”), Having regard to the report drawn up on 5 March 1996 by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 15 March 1991 by a French national, Mr   Simon Begue, against France; Whereas on 3 April 1996 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article   32, paragraph   1, of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article   48 of the Convention;   Whereas in his application, as declared admissible by the Commission on 2 December 1994, the applicant complained of the destruction, by prison authorities, of letters to his common-law wife and to the press, and of the opening of a letter sent to him by the Commission;   Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article   8 of the Convention ;   Whereas at the 576th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1, of the Convention, and agreed with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, by a decision adopted on 15 November 1996, that there had been in this case a violation of Article   8 of the Convention;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals made by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards just satisfaction to be awarded to the applicant, proposals supplemented by a letter of the President of the Commission dated 16 December 1997;   Whereas at the 647th meeting of the Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the Commission’s proposals, held by a decision adopted on 12 November 1998, in accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that the Government of the respondent State was to pay the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months, 7 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage and that interest should be payable on any unpaid sum, calculated on the basis of each full elapsed month of delay at the statutory rate applicable on the date of this decision, it being understood that the interest would accrue from the expiry of the time-limit until full payment was placed at the disposal of the applicant;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 15 November 1996 and 12 November 1998, having regard to France’s obligation under Article   32, paragraph   4, of the Convention to abide by them;   Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the respondent State accordingly recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new violations of the same kind as the one found in this case, notably through a new note, dated 20 June 1994, to all prison directors, which specified that the detainees' correspondence with the European Commission for Human Rights, whatever the organ, should remain unopened (see Resolution DH (97) 482 in the A.B. case) and indicated that the Commission’s report had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the Government of the respondent State paid the applicant the total sum of 7 000 French francs as just satisfaction,   Declares, after having taken note of the measures taken by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 32 of the Convention in this case;   Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case.