FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 41832/15 Ismayil Sadagat oglu BAGIROV against Azerbaijan

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 30 January 2020 as a Committee composed of:

Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer , President, Mārtiņš Mits , Lәtif Hüseynov , judges,

and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 21 August 2015,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant ’ s details are set out in the appended table.

The applicant was represented by Mr S.H. Brady, a lawyer practising in London.

The applicant ’ s complaints under Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention concerning the imposition of an administrative fine on him for unauthorised religious gathering by the domestic authorities were communicated to the Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”) .

THE LAW

The Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.

The declaration provides, in relevant parts, as follows:

“1. The Government of the Republic of Azerbaijan hereby wishes to express – by way of unilateral declaration – acknowledgement of the fact that there has been a violation of the applicant ’ s rights guaranteed under the Convention.

2. The Government is prepared to pay to the applicant, Ismayil Sadagat oglu Bagirov , the sum of 2,000 euros to cover any damages, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant on this amount. This sum shall be free of any tax that may be applicable and shall be payable within three months from the date of the notification of the striking-out judgment of the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c) of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned period, simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

...

4. The Government will also take all measures to ensure that any enforcement proceedings with respect to the applicant in the present case are terminated.

5. In the light of above, the Government would suggest that the circumstances of the present cases allow the Court to reach the conclusion that there exists ‘ any other reason ’ , as referred to in Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention, justifying to discontinue the examination of the application, and that, moreover, there are no reasons of a general character, as defined in Article 37 § 1 in fine , which would require the further examination of the case by virtue of that provision. Accordingly, the Government invites the Court to strike the application out of its list of cases.”

By a letter of 2 December 2019, the applicant indicated that he was not satisfied with the terms of the unilateral declaration. In particular, he contended that the amount of compensation provided in the Government ’ s unilateral declaration was low and that it lacked measures to prevent similar future Convention breaches.

The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:

“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.

Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continued (see, in particular, Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI).

The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the Jehovah ’ s Witnesses ’ prosecution following public preaching (see, for example, Kokkinakis v. Greece , 25 May 1993, §§ 27-50, Series A no. 260 ‑ A and the subsequent case-law).

Noting the admissions contained in the Government ’ s declaration as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 (c)).

In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the application may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (see Josipović v. Serbia ( dec. ), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list .

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government ’ s declaration and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.

Done in English and notified in writing on 20 February 2020 .

Liv Tigerstedt Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention

( prosecution for Jehovah ’ s Witnesses ’ public preaching)

Application no. Date of introduction

Applicant ’ s name

Date of birth

Representative ’ s name and location

Date of receipt of Government ’ s declaration

Date of receipt of applicant ’ s comments, if any

Amount awarded for any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant

(in euros) [1]

41832/15

21/08/2015

Ismayil Sadagat oglu BAGIROV

17/09/1995

Brady Heath Shane

London

05/11/2019

09/12/2019

2,000

[1] . Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.