Lexploria

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST CHAMBER

Application No. 27496/95

M. M.

against

Bulgaria

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

(adopted on 9 July 1997)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

PART I : STATEMENT OF THE FACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

PART II : SOLUTION REACHED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

INTRODUCTION

1. This Report relates to the application introduced under

Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human

Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by M.M. against Bulgaria on

28 March 1995. It was registered on 1 June 1995 under file

No. 27496/95.

2. The applicant was represented by Mrs. Zdravka Kalaydjieva, a

lawyer practising in Sofia.

3. The Government of Bulgaria were represented by

Mr. Ventzislav Ivanov, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

4. On 10 September 1996 the Commission (First Chamber) declared the

application admissible. It then proceeded to carry out its task under

Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:

"In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to

it:

a. it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake

together with the representatives of the parties an examination

of the petition and, if need be, an investigation, for the

effective conduct of which the States concerned shall furnish all

necessary facilities, after an exchange of views with the

Commission;

b. it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of

the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly

settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human Rights

as defined in this Convention."

5. The Commission (First Chamber) found that the parties had reached

a friendly settlement of the case and on 9 July 1997 it adopted this

Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention,

is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution

reached.

6. The following members were present when the Report was adopted:

Mrs. J. LIDDY, President

MM. M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

E. BUSUTTIL

A. WEITZEL

C.L. ROZAKIS

L. LOUCAIDES

B. MARXER

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

G. RESS

A. PERENIC

C. BÎRSAN

K. HERNDL

M. VILA AMIGÓ

Mrs. M. HION

Mr. R. NICOLINI

PART I

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

7. The applicant is a Bulgarian citizen, born in 1964 and resident

in Sofia.

8. In the divorce proceedings between the applicant and her husband

the custody of their three years' old child was granted to the father.

The applicant's alleged involvement with the religious association

Warriors of Christ was discussed in these proceedings.

9. The judicial decisions also granted the applicant the right to

spend with her child every second Saturday and up to twenty days every

summer, but her former husband refused to allow any contact with the

child.

10. In 1994 the applicant instituted civil execution proceedings for

the enforcement of her former husband's obligation to allow contact

with the child. The efforts of the civil enforcement judge were

fruitless as under Section 421 of the Civil Procedure Code he could

only impose a fine of 200 leva, which had become a nominal amount due

to the inflation in the country.

11. On 22 March 1995 the applicant complained to the prosecution

authorities requesting the institution of criminal proceedings against

her former husband for having disobeyed the judicial order concerning

the contact with her son, an alleged crime under Section 182 of the

Criminal Code. This was refused by decisions of 21 September and

16 October 1995.

12. Before the Commission the applicant complained under Articles 8

and 14 of the Convention that the custody of her child was granted to

the father because of her involvement with an untraditional religious

society and also that she could not obtain execution of the judicial

order providing for contact with her child, after having resorted to

all possible means. The applicant also complained under Article 6

para. 1 of the Convention that the courts were partial and under

Articles 9 and 14 of the Convention that the judicial decisions on the

custody issue constituted an indirect coercion on her to change her

religious beliefs.

PART II

SOLUTION REACHED

13. Following the decision on the admissibility of the application,

the Commission (First Chamber) placed itself at the disposal of the

parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance

with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties

to submit any proposals they wished to make.

14. In accordance with the usual practice, the Chamber Secretary,

acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to

explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement. Meetings

between the Chamber Secretary, assisted by a member of the Commission's

Secretariat, and the parties took place in Sofia on 27 June 1997.

15. Following these meetings the Commission received the following

agreement signed by the representatives of both parties:

"1. The Government express their concern for the need for

effective enforcement of court decisions providing for contact

between a child and a non-custodial parent, as well as their

concern for the need of respect for human rights as guaranteed

by the European Convention on Human Rights as interpreted by the

Convention organs.

2. The Government through the Sofia law enforcement

authority shall address themselves to the Sofia District Court

with a view to the institution of ex officio proceedings under

Section 106 para. 5 of the Family Code in the applicant's case.

The foregoing shall in no way be interpreted as an interference

with the independence and impartiality of the Court.

3. The Government acknowledge that it is also open to

the applicant to institute proceedings under Section 106 para. 5

of the Family Code before the competent court and to refer to

the Commission's decision of 10 September 1995 declaring her

application inadmissible.

4. The Government undertake to draft, in consultation

with the applicant's representative, and submit to the National

Assembly a legislative proposal for the amendment of the

relevant provisions concerning the enforcement of judicial

decisions providing for personal contact between a child and a

non-custodial parent, with a view to guaranteeing enforceability

of such decisions.

5. In respect of the issue of non-pecuniary damages,

which could arise in such matters, the applicant agrees, in view

of the achieved settlement, not to claim such damages. Within

three months following the approval of this settlement the

Government shall pay to the applicant the sum of 7,000 FF. Upon

the payment of this amount, and taking into account the amount

already paid by the Council of Europe by way of legal aid, the

applicant's costs and expenses in the present case shall be

deemed fully reimbursed."

16. At its session on 9 July 1997, the Commission noted that the

parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.

It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the

Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured

on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.

17. For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.

M.F. BUQUICCHIO J. LIDDY

Secretary President

to the First Chamber of the First Chamber

Menu

M. M. v. BULGARIA

M. M. v. BULGARIA

LEXI