CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 9 janvier 2009

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s87C74EA6 { font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s47737F29 { width:55.5pt; display:inline-block } .s7F74B77E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:12pt } .sF8AEFD1F { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4894483B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sBF98C6AB { width:98.78%; border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s9753430D { width:27.78%; 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 } .s2360F036 { width:14.44%; 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 } .sD6D7024E { width:14.46%; 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 } .s2163D317 { width:27.78%; 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 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sE0FAA4F5 { width:14.44%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA3F1EB5C { width:14.46%; 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 } .s66053943 { text-transform:uppercase } .sC0AC0CBE { width:27.78%; 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 } .sC2D98A6D { width:14.44%; 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 } .s250D930D { width:14.46%; 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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s23ADBB69 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s9091C2C9 { font-size:8pt; font-style:italic } Resolution CM/ResDH(2009)28 [1] Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in 20 cases concerning delays by the administration in paying additional compensation for expropriation against Turkey   (see details in Appendix)     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 violation of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concerns delays in payment of additional compensation for expropriation and the insufficient rate of default interest applicable (violations of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1);   Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with Turkey’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;   Having examined the measures taken by the respondent state to that effect;   Whereas during the examination of the cases 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 (see Resolutions ResDH(2001)70 and ResDH(2001)71 in the cases Aka and Akkuş against Turkey, respectively), in particular through the entry into force on 1 January 2000 of Law No. 4489, which brought the statutory rate of default interest into line with the annual rediscount rate applied by the Turkish Central Bank to short-term debts (the latter rate is fixed and permanently reviewed, taking into account particularly the country’s inflation rate), and indicated that the Court’s judgments had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned,   DECLARES 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(2009)28   Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of 20   cases concerning delays by the administration in paying additional compensation for expropriation against Turkey     Details of cases   Name of the case and application No. Date of judgment Final on Pecuniary damage Costs and expenses Date of payment ARSLANER 23903/02 24/05/2007 24/08/2007 10 500 € - 15/11/2007 AYDIN AND ŞENGÜL 75845/01 03/05/2007 03/08/2007 - - - C an and others 29189/02 24/01/2008 24/04/2008 32   148 € - 04/07/2008 ERBAKAN 32153/03 20/09/2007 20/12/2007 5 292 € 2 000 € 17/03/2008 E rdem and others 82/02 08/01/2008 08/04/2008 208   500 € - 26/06/2008 ILGUN and others 57399/00 29/11/2007 29/02/2008 2 165 € 2 500 € 26/05/2008 KARAKAS 33452/02 13/12/2007 13/03/2008 23 700 € - 29/05/2008 KAYA and others 56370/00 20/11/2007 20/02/2008 9 430 € 1 230 € 16/05/2008 KIZIR and others 117/02 26/06/2007 12/11/2007 7 700 € - 12/02/2008 K orkmaz 35758/03 24/01/2008 24/04/2008 1   385 € - 25/06/2008 KURKCU and others 7142/02 24/10/2006 24/01/2007 23 245 € 1 000 € 24/04/2007 GUNDUZ Memetali 27633/02 10/08/2006 12/02/2007 13 671 € 1 000 € 11/05/2007 MUTLU 8006/02 10/10/2006 12/02/2007 6 400 € 500 € 11/05/2007 ONEL 9292/02 21/09/2006 12/02/2007 41 000 € - 11/05/2007 Sarıpınar 42756/04+ 24/01/2008 24/04/2008 12   400 € - 03/07/2008 SEVER 9879/02 20/11/2007 20/02/2008 62 175 € - 14/05/2008 TOPKAYA 72317/01 05/12/2006 05/03/2007 44 600 € 1 000 € 04/06/2007 YALMAN and TURKMEN 23914/02 24/05/2007 24/08/2007 6 500 € 1 000 € 14/11/2007 YARDIMCI and others 5605/02 20/11/2007 20/02/2008 116 790 € - 15/05/2008 YENER 62633/00 05/12/2006 05/03/2007 4 165 € 500 € 04/06/2007   [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 January 2009 at the 1043rd meeting of the Ministers’   Deputies