The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),

Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Open Door and Dublin Well Woman case delivered

on 29 October 1992 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;

Recalling that the case originated in two applications

(Nos. 14234/88 and 14235/88) against Ireland, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 19 August and

15 September 1988 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by Open Door Counselling Ltd and Dublin Well Woman Centre Ltd, two companies incorporated in Ireland, and one citizen of the United States of America, Ms Bonnie Maher, and three Irish citizens,

Ms Ann Downes, Mrs X and Ms Maeve Geraghty, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaints that the High Court's injunction of 19 December 1986, as varied by the Supreme Court on

16 March 1988, which prohibited their dissemination of information to pregnant women about abortion services in the United Kingdom, violated their rights under Articles 8, 10 and 14 (art. 8, art. 10, art. 14) of the Convention;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 24 April 1991 and by the Government of Ireland

on 3 July 1991;

Whereas in its judgment of 29 October 1992 the Court:

- dismissed, by fifteen votes to eight, the government's plea that Mrs X and Ms Geraghty could not claim to be victims of a violation of the Convention;

- dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the government's preliminary objections;

- held, by fifteen votes to eight, that there had been a violation of Article 10 (art. 10), of the Convention;

- held, unanimously, that it was not necessary to examine the remaining complaints;

- held, by seventeen votes to six, that Ireland was to pay to Dublin Well Woman, within three months, 25 000 Irish pounds in respect of damages;

- held, unanimously, that Ireland was to pay to Open Door and Dublin Well Woman, within three months, in respect of costs and expenses, the sums resulting from the calculation to be made in accordance with paragraphs 90, 93 and 94 of the judgment;

- dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the claims for just satisfaction;

Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention;

Having invited the Government of Ireland to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment

of 29 October 1992, having regard to Ireland's obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;

Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of Ireland gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;

Having satisfied itself that on 29 January 1993, within the time-limit set, the Government of Ireland paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment of 29 October 1992,

Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Ireland, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.

Appendix to Resolution DH (96) 368

Information provided by the Government of Ireland

during the examination of the Open Door and Dublin Well Woman case

by the Committee of Ministers

In 1992, the Fourteenth Amendment to the Irish Constitution amended subsection 3 of Article 40 of the Constitution, which henceforth reads as follows:

"The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.

This subsection shall not limit freedom to obtain or make available, in the State, subject to such conditions as may be laid down by law, information relating to services lawfully available in another state."

The Irish Parliament has subsequently enacted the "Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Act, 1995".

According to this act it is henceforth lawful subject to certain conditions to give information which "is likely to be required by a woman for the purpose of availing herself of services provided outside the State for the termination of pregnancies and relates to such services or to persons who provide them", so-called act information (section 2).

Act information may be given to the public at meetings, in publications or on radio and television if it is lawful also in the foreign state in question and if it is truthful and objective and does not advocate or promote the termination of pregnancy

(section 3). Certain public notices and the distribution of unsolicited publications containing act information are prohibited (section 4). Doctors and other counsellors have the right to communicate act information on certain conditions. These conditions include a duty to be truthful and objective and to always mention that there exist other solutions than abortion (section 5). They also include a prohibition of having any financial or other interest in the persons or organisations abroad which are engaged in the termination of pregnancies (section 6) and of receiving any special financial benefits or advantages for the advice, either from interested foreign sources or from the woman herself

(section 7), and of making appointments on her behalf (section 8).

A person who contravenes the new legislation is guilty of an offence and is liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding 1 500 Irish pounds (section 10). Prosecutions may be brought only by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Searches and seizures in case there are reasonable grounds for suspecting such an offence may be ordered by the District Court (section 9) and, if an offence is found to have been committed, the court may order forfeiture of anything in which act information is published and which has been employed in the commission of the offence (section 12).

In a judgment of 23 June 1995, the High Court lifted, in so far as Dublin Well Woman Centre Ltd is concerned, the injunction which the High Court had imposed on 19 December 1986, as varied by the Supreme Court on 16 March 1988, and which had been at the origin of the case before the European Court of Human Rights.

The Irish Government considers that these measures will prevent a repetition of the violation found by the European Court of Human Rights and ensure full compliance with Article 53

(art. 53) of the Convention.