Resolution CM/ ResDH (2012) 125 [1] Pandjikidze and Gorgiladze against Georgia

Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

(Application No. 30323/02 and 4313/04, judgments of 27 October 2009 and 20 October 2009,

final on 27 January 2010 and 20 January 2010)

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 referred to as “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 the violation of the right to a fair trial (violations of Article 6§1) and conditions of the applicant ’ s detention in the Gorgiladze case which amounted to a violation of Article 3 (see details in Appendix);

Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with Georgia ’ 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, the details of which appear in the Appendix;

DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent State (see Appendix), 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 (2012) 125

Information about the measures to comply with the judgments in the cases of Pandjikidze and Gorgiladze against Georgia

I. Introductory case summary

In both cases, the Court found a violation of Article 6§1 of the Convention on the grounds that the applicants were tried by a court which was "not established by law". Two of the three judges sitting at the bench of the court that convicted the applicants were not professional judges and the exercise of their functions had no sufficient legal basis in domestic law (violations of Article 6§1).

The Gorgiladze case concerns conditions of the applicant ’ s detention at Tbilisi prison No. 5 which amounted to a violation of Article 3 (violation of Article 3).

II. Payments of just satisfaction and individual measures

a) Details of just satisfaction

Name and application number

Pecuniary damage

Non- pecuniary damage

Costs and expenses

Total

Pandjikidze and o thers

No . 30323/02

6000 EUR

6 000 EUR

Paid on 07/04/2010

Gorgiladze

No. 4313/04

5000 EUR

5 000 EUR

Paid on 07/04/2010

b) Individual measures

Violation of Article 6

In the case of Pandjikidze and others , the applicants were convicted of high treason on 8/11/2001 and sentenced to 3 years ’ or 2 years and 5 months ’ imprisonment respectively. The applicants were released after having served their sentence. Mr Gorgiladze was sentenced on 21/05/2003 to 18 years ’ imprisonment for homicide. He is currently serving his sentence (see also below under “Article 3”).

Under Article 41, the Court stated that when, as in the present case, there has been a conviction at first instance by a tribunal not established by law contrary to the requirements of Article 6§1 of the Convention and that there has been no general examination of the case on the merits since, a new trial or reopening of the proceedings on the merits at the applicants ’ request is in principle an appropriate way to redress the violation found.

The Georgian Parliament adopted Article 310 “e” of the Code of Criminal Procedure in response to the judgments of the Court . On 1/1/2012, a legislative amendment was adopted allowing the entry into force of Article 310 “e” of the CCP on that date. According to this legislative amendment, applicants concerned by judgments of the European Court delivered before 1/1/2012, were allowed to request, before 1 July 2012, reopening of proceedings.

On 23 January 2012, the Government Agent informed Mr Gorgiladze (the only applicant still in prison) of the possibility of introducing an application for re-examination of his case before the Tbilisi Court of Appeal in accordance with Article 310 “e” of the CCP as amended.

However , the applicants have not applied for reopening of proceedings.

Additional amendments were further introduced in the Code of Criminal Procedure on 19 April 2012. According to these amendments, a request for reopening following a judgment by the European Court can be introduced within one year after a judgment of the European Court becomes final.

Violation of Article 3 ( Gorgiladze case)

When the Court rendered its judgment, the applicant was no longer detained in Tbilisi Prison No. 5 (§17 of the judgment). The authorities indicated that Mr Gorgiladze is currently serving his sentence in Prison No. 17 of Gegouti (West of Georgia) and that the conditions of his detention are in conformity with the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention. The applicant did not make any further complaint before the competent authorities.

Consequently, no other individual measure was therefore considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.

III. General measures

a) Violation of Article 6

- Measures taken with regard to the right to a fair trail

Amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure of 25/03/2005 abolished the institution of non professional judges (§46 of the Pandjikidze and others judgment; §19 of the Gorgiladze judgment).

- Other measures

Both judgments in these cases were translated into Georgian, published in the Official Journal and sent out to various State instances. The Georgian version of the judgments can be consulted on the Websites of the Ministry of Justice and of the Supreme Court of Georgia. The judgments can also be found on the bulletin Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights against Georgia , published in 2010 by the Human Rights Centre of the Supreme Court of Georgia - a compilation of all judgments rendered by the European Court against Georgia between 2004 and 2010 which has been sent out to domestic courts.

b) Violation of Article 3

The authorities indicated that Tbilisi Prison No 5 was demolished end of 2008.

IV. 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 Con vention found by the European Court in these cases, that these measures will prevent new similar violations and that Georgia has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Con vention.

[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 26 September 2012 at the 11 50 th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies .