Resolution ResDH (2001)53 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 5 July 1999 in the case of Matter against the Slovak Republic

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 26 February 2001 at the 741 st meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),

Having regard to the final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Matter case delivered on 5 July 1999 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;

Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 31534/96) against the Slovak Republic, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 7 August 1996 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Wilibald Rudolf Matter, a Slovak national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint relating to the excessive length of the proceedings concerning his legal capacity and to his forcible examination in a mental hospital;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 3 November 1998;

Whereas in its judgment of 5 July 1999 the Court unanimously:

- held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regards the length of proceedings concerning the applicant's legal capacity;

- held that there had been no violation of Article 8 of the Convention as regards his forcible examination in a mental hospital;

- held that it was not required to decide on the award of just satisfaction under Article 41 of the Convention since the applicant had submitted no claim in this respect;

Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Having invited the Government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 5 July 1999, having regard to the Slovak Republic’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it;

Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the respondent State accordingly gave the Committee information about the individual and general measures taken in consequence of the judgment, with the view to remedying the situation of the applicant and to preventing new violations of the same kind as those found in this case (this information appears in the appendix to this resolution),

Wheraes no amount of money should be paid to the applicant in respect of just satisfaction since the later had submitted no claim in this respect,

Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Slovakia, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.

Appendix to Resolution ResDH (2001)53

Information provided by the Government of the Slovak Republic during the examination of the Matter case

By the Committee of Ministers

As regards individual measures:

As a result of the requirement of "special diligence" under Article 6 of the Convention (paragraph 54 of the judgment of the European Court in the Matter case), the competent court (District Court of Čadca ) has given high priority to the Matter case in order to speed up the impugned proceedings relating to the applicant’s legal capacity. At present, it has however been impossible to conclude the case due to the applicant’s poor state of health and the important problem it has posed for the medical examination. The Government is informed that the judicial authorities are continuing to follow up the case with the greatest diligence, as required by the Convention, and that they are accordingly taking all possible measures to conclude the proceedings.

As regards general measures:

The European Court's judgment has been transmitted with a circular letter from the Ministry of Justice dated 5 July 1999 to the Presidents of the courts directly concerned (District Court of Čadca and Regional Court of Banska Bystricaa ). The circular specifically drew their attention to the requirement of “special diligence” in dealing with this kind of cases and invited them to take the necessary measures to avoid similar violations in future. The President of the Regional Court so instructed all the other district courts.

In order to improve the awareness at the national level of the Convention’s requirements in this respect, the Court's judgment (in Slovak translation) has furthermore been published in Justicnà revue (No. 5/2000, pp. 618-627), a journal which is widely distributed in legal circles.

The Slovak Government considers that, as a result of the measures adopted and in view of the direct effect of the Convention and of the European Court's jurisprudence in the Slovak law (see inter alia the case of Kadubec against the Slovak Republic, Resolution DH(99)553), the domestic courts will not fail to give the necessary priority to the cases requiring "special diligence" under Article 6 of the Convention, thus preventing new similar violations of this provision. The Government accordingly believes that the Slovak Republic has complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

Moreover, the Government recalls that comprehensive changes which are being introduced in the codes of civil and criminal procedure and to the Rules of procedure of regional and district courts, will also help, in general, to shorten the overall length of judicial proceedings (see the case of Prelozník against the Slovak Republic , Final Resolution DH (99) 551).