CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 21 septembre 1994

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }       The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),        Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Messina case delivered on 26 February 1993 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;        Recalling that the case originated in an application against Italy lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 27 October 1987 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by Mr Antonio Messina, an Italian national, and that the Commission declared admissible his complaint that certain criminal proceedings brought against him had not been concluded within a reasonable time and also certain complaints regarding interferences with his right to respect for his correspondence;        Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 13 April 1992;        Whereas in its judgment of 26 February 1993 the Court:        - held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1);        - held, by seven votes to two, that there had been a breach of Article 8 (art. 8);        - held, unanimously, that the respondent state was to pay to the applicant, within three months, 5 000 000 Italian lire for non-pecuniary damage;        - dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the claim for just satisfaction;        Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention;        Having invited the Government of Italy to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 26 February 1993, having regard to its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;        Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of Italy gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;        Having satisfied itself that on 18 May 1994 the Government of Italy paid the applicant the sum provided for in the judgment of 26 February 1993,        Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Italy, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.                   Appendix to Resolution DH (94) 62            Information provided by the Government of Italy            during the examination of the Messina case                   by the Committee of Ministers        The government finds that the reforms cited in, inter alia, the appendix to Resolution DH (92) 37 in the Mori case (the reform of the Code of Criminal Procedure which entered into force on 24 October 1989, the reform of the Court of Cassation's working methods and the increased budgetary appropriations for the administration of justice) are apt to prevent further repetitions of the violation of the right to a trial within a reasonable time found by the Court in the present case.        With regard to the violation of Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention established by the Court, the government (Ministry of Justice) sent out, on 14 March 1994, a circular to the directors of regional prison administrations and to the directors of prisons for adults (including district prisons) informing them of the contents of the Court's judgment and ordering them to adopt the following measures in order to solve, by administrative means, the problems posed by this judgment while awaiting an amendment to Rule 36 of the Enforcement Regulations (regolamente di esecuzione).        Prison directors should henceforth ensure that letters and telegrams addressed to a detained person which are being held back for inspection are entered on a special register.   The addressee must immediately be informed of the measure.   If, following the competent judicial authority's control of the interception, the letters or telegrams in question are to be delivered to the detained person who is the addressee, the prison director shall ensure that the addressee signs and dates a receipt.        Outgoing letters and telegrams which are held back for inspection must also be entered on the register.   If, following the control exercised by the competent judicial authority, the correspondence is to be forwarded to the addressee, the date of dispatch shall be noted on the register (in the case of a registered or insured letter, or a telegram, the entry on the register shall also include particulars as to the means of dispatch used).   The prison director shall also ensure that the persons detained are informed of the decision.   This shall be evidenced by the detained person countersigning, with an indication of the date of signature, the pertinent entry on the register.