Areas where the European Convention on Human Rights cannot be implemented

Parliamentary Assembly
Assembl�e parlementaire

Areas where the European Convention on Human Rights cannot be implemented
Recommendation 1606 (2003)

Doc. 10037
24 January 2004

Reply from the Committee of Ministers
adopted at the 869^th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies (21 January 2004)

1. The Committee of Ministers welcomes Recommendation 1606 (2003) of the Parliamentary Assembly on Areas where the European Convention on Human Rights cannot be implemented, which has been brought to the attention of its governments. It raises important issues which it has considered carefully and on which work is in progress in the Council of Europe.

2. It shares the concern of the Parliamentary Assembly that notwithstanding the fact that the Convention applies to all States Parties, there are in practice areas where obstacles to its implementation exist, mainly due to ongoing armed conflicts, internal disturbances and tensions. As the Assembly is aware, cases concerning certain aspects of this problem have been brought before the European Court of Human Rights. In addition, the Committee of Ministers recalls the existence of the various other human rights mechanisms of the Council of Europe, such as the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture, the European Committee of Social Rights, the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance or the Commissioner for Human Rights, and notes that there would not necessarily be obstacles to their operation in all the situations covered by the Assembly Recommendation.

3. In response to the Assembly’s recommendation that the Committee of Ministers takes steps to ensure that the Convention is better known and that training is widely provided in order to prevent human rights violations (paragraph 10 (i)), the Committee of Ministers draws attention to its Recommendation Rec(2002)13 on publication and dissemination in the member states of the text of the European Convention on Human Rights and of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights of 18 December 2002. It further notes that the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) is presently drafting a Committee of Ministers’ recommendation to member states on the European Convention on Human Rights in university education and professional training^[1]. Reference is also made to the Final Activity Report of the Committee of Experts for the Development of Human Rights (DH-DEV) on the Protection of Human Rights during Armed Conflict as well as during Internal Disturbances and Tensions and to the draft declaration of the Committee of Ministers subsequently adopted by the CDDH and on 21 January 2004 by the Ministers’ Deputies, which underlines the importance of compliance with applicable human rights standards in these situations, the existence of ongoing activities, the fact-finding role which the Commissioner can play and the need to elaborate practical information and training materials in this field.

4. As to the Assembly’s recommendation to envisage an actio popularis and create the post of public prosecutor at the Court, entrusting this task to the Human Rights Commissioner (paragraphs 10 (ii-iii)), the Committee of Ministers would like to inform the Assembly that the CDDH, in the context of its ongoing work on the reform of the Convention mechanism, has received a proposal from the Commissioner to amend the Convention so as to authorise the Commissioner to lodge applications with the Court. This proposal is currently being examined by the CDDH.

5. Regarding the Assembly’s recommendation to include in the Convention an obligation on states to comply with measures imposed by the Court (paragraph 10 (iv)), the Committee of Ministers observes that the case-law of the Court as to whether its interim measures are binding is not yet fully established; a relevant case is presently pending before it^[2]. It therefore considers that the question of the modification of the Convention as proposed by the Assembly does not arise at the moment.

6. The Committee of Ministers also recalls, as regards the execution of judgments, that Article 46 � 1 of the Convention already provides that “the High Contracting Parties undertake to abide by the final judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties”. It acknowledges however that the present situation as regards the execution of judgments of the Court could be improved and, in this context, refers to the Final Report on “Guaranteeing the long-term effectiveness of the European Court of Human Rights” of the CDDH^[3], which contains, inter alia, proposals to improve and accelerate the execution of judgments of the Court. The CDDH is currently looking into how these proposals could be incorporated in an amending Protocol to the Convention, as part of the ongoing reform of the system. In addition, the Committee of Ministers is currently examining how to deal with slow or inadequate execution of judgments of the Court^[4].

7. Therefore, the Committee of Ministers concludes that the issues raised in the Assembly’s Recommendation are currently being addressed in various ongoing activities of the Council of Europe. It will keep the Assembly informed about any developments in relation to the issues raised in the Recommendation.

[1] Prepared by the Committee of Experts for the Improvement of Procedures for the Protection of Human Rights (DH-PR).

[2] Mamatkulov and Abdurasulovic v. Turkey (Nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99), judgment of 6 February 2003, submitted to the Grand Chamber and pending before it.

[3] Document CDDH (2003)006 Final.

[4] See also Parliamentary Assembly Recommendations 1477 (2000), 1546 (2001) and 1576 (2002) regarding the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.