CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 20 octobre 2003

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } Resolution ResDH(2003)158 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 2 July 2002 (final on 2 October 2002) in the case of Dacewicz against Poland   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 October 2003 at the 854th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Dacewicz case delivered on 2   July 2002 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;   Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 34611/97) against Poland, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 25 March 1996 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr   Zbigniew   Dacewicz, a Polish national, and that the Court, seised of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaint concerning the violation of the applicant’s right to be brought, after having been arrested, before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power;   Whereas in its judgment of 2 July 2002 the Court unanimously:   -   held that there had been a violation of Article 5, paragraph 3, of the Convention;   -   held that the finding of a violation constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction for the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicant;   -   held that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicant, within three months from the date at which the judgment became final, 8 900 Polish zlotys in respect of costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable, less 630 euros to be converted into Polish zlotys at the rate applicable at the date of delivery of this judgment and that simple interest at an annual rate of 20% would be payable on this sum from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;   -   dismissed the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article   46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 2 July 2002, having regard to Poland’s obligation under Article   46, paragraph   1, of the Convention to abide by it; Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new violations of the same kind as that found in this case (see Resolution ResDH(2002)124 in the case of Niedbała against Poland), in particular with the entry into force on 1 September 1998 (i.e. subsequent to the impugned facts) of the new Code of Criminal Procedure which provides that detention on remand shall be ordered by a competent court of first instance at the request by a prosecutor (Article 250);   Having satisfied itself that on 23 December 2002, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sum provided for in the judgment of 2 July 2002,   Declares, after having examined of the information supplied by the Government of Poland, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.