Overview
Cases
Activities
Documents
Restreint
  Print  
  
  Send  
  
  Français 
 

Frequently asked questions


Questions concerning applicants
General questions



Questions concerning applicants


I lodged an application with the European Court of Human Rights, and the Court has just delivered its judgment. What do I have to do to ensure that the Committee of Ministers supervises its execution ?
Nothing. Judgments are automatically forwarded to the Committee of Ministers when they become final and are included in its agenda without the need for any action by applicants. However, it is up to applicants to ensure that the respondent Government has the necessary bank account details to make any payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court. Applicants can also facilitate the Committee’s work by informing it of any specific difficulties encountered (just satisfaction paid after the due date, interest for overdue payments not paid, refusal to reopen proceedings, etc.).


I lodged an application with the European Court of Human Rights, and the Court’s judgment ordered the State to pay me a sum of money as just satisfaction. When will I be paid?
When the Court orders a State to pay a sum of money as just satisfaction, it normally specifies in its judgment that payment must be paid within three months of the date on which the judgment becomes final.
Under Article 44(2) of the Convention, a judgment of Chamber of the Court becomes final :

  • when the parties declare that they will not request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber [a possibility provided for under Article 43]; or
  • three months after the date of judgment, if the referral of the case to the Grand Chamber has not been requested; or
  • when the panel of the Grand Chamber rejects the request to refer under Article 43.
  • a judgment of the Grand Chamber becomes final immediately.
Where there is no request for referral to the Grand Chamber, i.e. in the majority of cases, the respondent Government therefore has six months within which to make the payment of just satisfaction.
If payment is made outside this time-limit, the Court’s judgments usually provide for default interest to be paid.
The case comes before the Committee of Ministers at each Human Rights meeting until the State concerned has provided the necessary information concerning the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court, including default interest payments where necessary.


I have been paid the amount of just satisfaction awarded to me, but outside the time-limit. What should I do ?
When the payment of just satisfaction is made after the time-limit for payment has expired, the respondent State is obliged to pay default interest if this formed part of the Court’s order in its judgment. In principle, it is for the government to provide the necessary information about payment. However, the applicant can inform the Committee of Ministers of problems with late payments by providing the Committee with copies of documents showing the payment made. In any case, the Committee will continue to follow the execution of the judgment until the amount owed has been paid in full.




General questions

I would like to know what is happening in the examination of case X, which is currently before the Committe of Ministers. How do I find out?
The Committee of Ministers’ debates on human rights questions are carried out on the basis of an agenda including a list of general questions and of specific cases to be examined. Cases are grouped in sections according to the state of progress of the supervision of judgments, and a summary of the issues raised in each case and by the execution of the judgment is included. These agendas are available to the public and can be consulted on the website of the Committee of Ministers after the meetings have taken place.
The decisions taken following the examination of each case at these meetings, the interim resolutions and final resolutions adopted by the Committee and a certain number of other working documents are also available to the public.


Can applicants or other persons send information to the Committee of Ministers about the execution of a case that is currently being supervised by the Committee?
The rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers for the supervision of the execution of judgments of the Court provide that the Committee of Ministers shall be entitled to consider any communication from the injured party with regard to the payment of the just satisfaction or the taking of individual measures.
No specific provision is made with respect to general measures, but in practice, any information that allows for a better evaluation to be made of the legal situation involved can be forwarded to the Department for the Execution of Judgments.


What means are available to the Committee of Ministers to exert pressure on a State that does not want to execute a judgment?
The Committee of Ministers is a political organ and, as such, it can bring its weight to bear on the State concerned to execute the Court’s judgment, including through the use of the heavy political sanctions provided for by the Statute of the Council of Europe.
Fortunately, in practice, the supervision of the execution of the Court’s judgments is essentially – and successfully – based on constructive and co-operative dialogue between states.


How many cases are currently pending before the Committee of Ministers?
See the section on Statistics.


How is execution of ECHR judgments handled at national level? Which are the domestic authorities entrusted with the execution of ECHR judgments?
Article 46 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) provides that "The High Contracting Parties undertake to abide by the final judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties".
This legal obligation to comply with ECHR judgments involves all the State's authorities, although in the Committee of Ministers only Government are represented through their Permanent representations to the Council of Europe. The Permanent representations are the direct interlocutors as regards execution of judgments.
In practice, as soon as a final judgment finding a violation of the ECHR is issued the State is responsible for identifying the relevant domestic authorities that should be specifically informed of the judgment, in particular when these authorities are called to take execution measures.
The Government has then to inform the Committee of Ministers of the measures envisaged, the domestic authorities involved and the provisional time-table for adoption of the measures. On this basis, the Committee of Ministers supervises the regular progression of the measures announced and, in case of problems or delays, seeks appropriate solutions in cooperation with the relevant authorities and the State's Delegation.
Therefore, there is no pre-definite authorities in charge of the execution of ECHR judgments, although there might exist a central national institution in charge of ensuring coordination on issues concerning execution of ECHR judgments.
All relevant State authorities are thus called, within their competence, to take the necessary measures to ensure the execution of ECHR judgments, i.e. to ensure that the consequences of the violations are remedied (payment of just satisfaction and adoption of individual measures) and that new violations are prevented (adoption of general measures). Many violations are thus solved by the Courts as these align their case-law with ECHR requirements.
If the courts or any other relevant national authorities fail to take the necessary measures, the State's responsibility is at stake and other domestic authorities might have to intervene in order to achieve the expected result: while the State is indeed free, within certain limits, to choose the means of execution it is legally bound to attain the execution result required. A typical example in this respect is the adoption of legislative measures by the Parliament or the Government in cases where the expected change of case-law did not take place. It should be noted that in States where the Convention and its case-law enjoy direct effect and are therefore directly applied by the Courts, it has sometimes been possible to invalidate through judicial procedures legal provisions that ran contrary to the ECHR. In such States, you will notice that the mere publication of a judgment may often be accepted as a sufficient execution measure as it is assumed that national courts will not fail to adapt their interpretation of the law in accordance with the ECHR judgments.
If you wish to search more in detail the authorities involved in the execution of cases against a specific State, you should refer to the information included in Final Resolutions (as regards closed cases) or in the annotated agendas and orders of business of CMDH meetings (as regards pending cases).
Final Resolutions can be found in the HUDOC database of the Court. Relevant extracts of the resolutions, concerning general measures, can also be found on our website in "Documents", "cases closed - general measures taken".
As regards pending cases, you will find the relevant information on our website, "Documents", then choose "agendas and documents for HR meetings - all documents" and seek the agenda for each meeting or "Documents" then "main cases pending for supervision of execution" and "cases pending for supervision of execution" (update version under preparation).