CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 31 octobre 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 } .s87C74EA6 { font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s7F74B77E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:12pt } .sF8AEFD1F { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4894483B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sFB5BB313 { width:29.88pt; display:inline-block } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s5A58263B { height:26.3pt } .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 } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .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 } .s65561073 { height:27pt } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; 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 } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-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 } .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 } .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 } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .s9275BB19 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0000ff } .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)111 [1] Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights L. and V. against Austria S. L. against Austria   (Applications No. 39392/98 and 45330/99, judgments of 9 January 2003, final on 9 April 2003)     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 judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;   Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concern a discriminatory restriction of the applicants' right to private life (violations of Article 14 combined with Article 8), (see details in Appendix);   Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with Austria's obligation under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgments;   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 applicants the just satisfaction provided in the judgments (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 judgments, 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;   DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix) and considering the decision taken at the 871st meeting of the Ministers' Deputies (12   February   2004), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and   DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.     Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)111   Information about the measures to comply with the judgments in the cases of L. and V. against Austria S. L. against Austria     Introductory case summary   The cases concern the fact that former Article 209 of the Austrian Criminal Code incriminated consensual male homosexual acts by adults with teenagers aged between fourteen and eighteen years old whereas, at the material time, consensual heterosexual or lesbian acts between adults and persons over fourteen were not punishable. The European Court found that the fact of keeping Article 209 in force and the conviction of the applicants in the L. and V. case under this article constituted a discriminatory interference with their right to private life (violations of Article 14 combined with Article 8). In the case of L. and V., the applicants were convicted in 1997, under Article 209, and given suspended sentences of eight and six months' imprisonment and three years' probation. In the case of S.L., the Court found that the applicant, who was sure of his homosexuality at the age of fifteen, was prevented by former Article 209 from entering into any sexual relationship corresponding to his sexual orientation.     I.   Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures   a) Details of just satisfaction   Name Application No. Non-pecuniary damage Costs and expenses Total Paid on L. and V. 39392/98 30   000 € 17   133.53 € 47   133.53 € 03/07/03 S. L. 45330/99 5   000 € 5   000 € 10   000€ 25/06/03     b) Individual measures   In the case of L. and V., the applicants may apply for the reopening of the proceedings in order to have the consequences of their convictions erased.     II.   General measures   Article 209 was repealed on 10 July 2002 with effect from 14 August 2002. A summary of the Court's judgments and decisions concerning Austria is regularly prepared by the Federal Chancelory and disseminated widely to relevant Austrian authorities as well as Parliament and courts. Furthermore, judgments of the European Court are accessible to all judges and state attorneys through the internal database of the Austrian Ministry of Justice (RIS). Judgments of the European Court concerning Austria are habitually published in a summary version via www.menschenrechte.ac.at together with a link to the Court's judgments in English.       III.   Conclusions of the respondent state   The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicants of the violations of the Convention found by the European Court in these cases, that these measures will prevent new, similar violations and that Austria has thus complied with its obligations under Article   46 paragraph 1 of the Convention. [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 31 October 2007 at the 1007th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies