Resolution CM/ ResDH (2018)104 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights 19 cases against Bulgaria

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 March 2018 at the 1310 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

Application

Case

Judgment of

Final on

54578/00

ALEXOV

22/08/2008

45358/04

CHERVENKOV

27/02/2013

55389/00

DOBREV

10/08/2006

10/11/2006

61507/00

GEORGIEV ANDREI

26/07/2007

26/10/2007

44082/98

I.I.

09/06/2005

09/09/2005

4473/02+

ILIEV AND OTHERS

10/02/2011

10/05/2011

41211/98

IOVCHEV

02/02/2006

02/05/2006

391/03

IÅžYAR

20/11/2008

20/02/2009

55712/00

KOSTADINOV

07/02/2008

07/05/2008

28674/03

KOSTOV SLAVCHO

27/11/2008

27/02/2009

57830/00

MALECHKOV

28/09/2007

23810/05

MANOLOV

04/11/2014

04/02/2015

18382/05

RADKOV No. 2

10/02/2011

10/05/2011

27887/06

SABEV

28/05/2013

28/08/2013

16391/05

SHAHANOV

10/01/2012

10/04/2012

37449/02

SHISHMANOV

08/01/2009

08/04/2009

49438/99

STAYKOV

12/10/2006

12/01/2007

50765/99

TODOROV TODOR

05/04/2007

05/07/2007

56856/00

YORDANOV

10/08/2006

10/11/2006

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 final judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee in these cases and to the violations established on account of poor detention conditions and/or restrictive penitentiary regimes applied in respect of the applicants, the lack of effective remedy and the absence in practice of a real possibility to obtain reduction of a life sentence (violations of Articles 3 and 13), as well as irregularities as regards detention on remand and the lack of enforceable right to compensation (violations of Article 5, paragraphs 1, 3, 4, 5) , the excessive length of criminal proceedings and the lack of effective remedy in this respect (violations of Articles 6 and 13), the infringement of the right to free assistance from an interpreter (violation of Article 6, paragraph 3 e)), the unlawful search of a home and the unjustified monitoring of correspondence in prison (violations of Article 8);

Recalling the respondent State’s obligation, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:

- of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and

- of general measures preventing similar violations;

Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with the above-mentioned obligation;

Having examined the action plans provided by the government indicating the individual measures adopted to give effect to the judgments (see documents DH-DD(2013)417 , DH-DD(2015)755-rev , DH-DD(2016)25 , DH-DD(2016)25-add ), as well as the information summarised in the document CM/ Inf /DH(2011)45 and the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court;

Recalling that, in view of the information submitted, the Committee considered at the 1236 th ( Alexov , Dobrev , Andrei Georgiev , I.I., Iliev and Others, Iovchev , Isyar , Kostadinov , Slavcho Kostov , Malechkov , Radkov No. 2, Shishmanov , Staykov , Todor Todorov , Yordanov, Shahanov , Sabev ) and 1250 th ( Chervenkov and Manolov ) meetings that no further individual measure is required in these cases;

Noting also that the applicants who are still detained now have at their disposal preventive and compensatory remedies introduced by the Bulgarian authorities in response to the Neshkov and Others pilot judgment;

Recalling that the closure of these cases in no way prejudges the Committee’s evaluation of the general measures required to resolve the problems related to poor conditions of detention, overcrowding, lack of adequate health care and application of restrictive penitentiary regimes; to ensure the proper functioning of the domestic remedies (preventive and compensatory), as well as to guarantee that all persons serving life sentences have a real possibility to obtain reduction of their sentence; these measures are being examined in the context of the cases Kehayov , Neshkov , Gavazov , Harakchiev and Toloumov ;

Noting that the questions raised by the violations of the rights of the applicants guaranteed by Article 5 in the cases of I.I., Alexov , Kostadinov and Malechkov have been examined in a number of cases whose supervision has been closed, in particular Assenov and Others ( ResDH (2000)109 ), Nikolov and Shishkov ( CM/ ResDH (2007)158 ), Yankov ( CM/ ResDH (2013)102 ), Evgeni Ivanov ( CM/ ResDH (2012)164 ) and Bochev ( CM/ ResDH (2017)382 );

Noting that the questions related to excessive length of criminal proceedings and the lack of effective remedies, raised by the cases Shahanov and Iovchev , have been examined in the context of the supervision of the pilot judgments Finger and Dimitrov and Hamanov (Final Resolution CM/ ResDH (2015)154 ) and the Kitov judgment (Final Resolution CM/ ResDH (2017)420 );

Noting that the questions related to the infringement of the right to free assistance by an interpreter raised by the Isyar case have been examined in the context of the supervision of the Hovanesian judgment (Final resolution CM/ ResDH (2012)157 );

Noting that the questions raised by the unjustified monitoring of correspondence in prison in the Shahanov , Iliev and Others and Chevenkov cases have been examined in the context of the Petrov group of cases (Final resolution CM/ ResDH ( 2 014)258 );

Noting that the questions raised by the unlawful searches in the Alexov , Dobrev and Yordanov cases are being examined in the context of the Peev group of cases,

DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases as regards the individual measures and

DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.