CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 20 avril 2007

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s2E520A3F { font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s7F74B77E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:12pt } .sF8AEFD1F { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4894483B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s100FA2D { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:18pt; font-size:12pt } .s5180A526 { width:29.33pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB2A0F2B6 { font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s8DD1D08A { vertical-align:top } .sA91C8AC { border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; vertical-align:top } .s74C12B71 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; vertical-align:top } .s9538EC41 { height:0pt } .sE7D07D96 { width:92.95pt } .s6844857B { width:57.5pt } .s6A423CF7 { width:98.2pt } .s2AB6DAAB { width:90.85pt } .sCE984C3E { width:114.25pt } .sE40C1F5F { width:92.8pt } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .s7A64F404 { text-decoration:underline } .sF66F4DA4 { width:23.21pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s23ADBB69 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)55 [1] Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights Frommelt against Liechtenstein   (Application No. 49158/99, judgment of 24 June 2004, final on 24 September 2004)     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 referred to as “the Convention” and “the Court”),   Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;   Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the absence of an adversarial hearing concerning the decision, taken in 1997, to extend the applicant's detention on remand (violation of Article 5, paragraph 4), (see details in Appendix);   Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with Liechtenstein's obligation under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;   Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee's Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),   Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgment, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of - individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and   - general measures preventing, similar violations;   Having examined the measures taken by the respondent state to that effect, the details of which appear in the Appendix,   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and DECIDES to close the examination of this case.   Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)55   Information about the measures taken to comply with the judgment in the case of Frommelt against Liechtenstein     Introductory case summary   The case concerns the absence of an adversarial hearing concerning the decision, taken in 1997, to extend the applicant's detention on remand (violation of Article 5, paragraph 4). The European Court found that the court of appeal had extended the duration of the applicant's pre-trial detention to the maximum of one year without hearing him or giving him the opportunity to comment on the requests of the investigating judge and the prosecutor.     I.   Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures   a) Details of just satisfaction   Pecuniary damage Non-pecuniary damage Costs and expenses Total - - 315 € 315 € Paid on 28/10/2004       b) Individual measures   The applicant's detention on remand came to an end in August 1998.     II.   General measures   It may be noted that the Liechtenstein Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) does not require a detainee to be heard prior to a decision to prolong his detention to the maximum period of one year under paragraph 138 section 2 StPO. However, given the severity of such a decision and the requirement of the case-law of the European Court, the respondent state has informed the Secretariat that it has changed its procedural practice accordingly. Before the third Senate of the superior court ( Fürstliches Obergericht ), which is responsible for such decisions, decides to prolong a pre-trial detention, the detainee is given the opportunity to comment either directly or via his legal representative. The judgment of the European Court has been sent out to the courts and the justice authorities concerned, including public prosecutors. The judgment was published in the Liechtensteinische Juristen-Zeitung (LJZ), September 2005, p. 121 - 124 as part of the official compilation of decisions ( Liechtensteinische Entscheidungssammlung , LES). Furthermore, the website of the respondent state provides for a direct link to the European Court's website ( www.liechtenstein.li <http://www.liechtenstein.li> - Staat - Aussenpolitik - Multilaterale Beziehungen/Internationale Organisationen - Europarat ).     III.   Conclusions of the respondent state   The government considers that the general measures adopted will prevent new, similar violations and that Liechtenstein has thus complied with its obligations under Article   46 paragraph 1 of the Convention. [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 April 2007 at the 992nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies