MINISTERS’ DEPUTIES

Information documents

CM/Inf/DH(2022)25

8 December 2022

Strategy paper regarding the supervision of the execution of cases pending against the Russian Federation

 

I.          Introduction

1.         It is recalled that the Russian Federation ceased to be a member of the Council of Europe as from 16 March 2022 (Resolution CM/Res(2022)2), and a Party to the Convention as from 16 September 2022. The Committee continues to supervise the execution of the judgments and friendly settlements concerned, and the Russian Federation is required to implement them (§ 7 of Resolution CM/Res(2022)3).

2.         In the light of this continuing obligation to implement the Court’s judgments, the Department for the Execution of the Judgments of the European Court for Human Rights (DEJ) has continued to write to the Russian authorities to request information on cases, action plans/reports and to forward communications received under Rule 9. However, since 3 March 2022, the Russian authorities have ceased all communication with the Secretariat.

3.         In accordance with paragraph 7 of Resolution CM/Res(2022)3, “The Russian Federation is to continue to participate in the meetings of the Committee of Ministers when the latter supervises the execution of judgments with a view to providing and receiving information concerning the judgments where it is the respondent or applicant State, without the right to participate in the adoption of decisions by the Committee nor to vote”. However, so far there has been no Russian participation in the Committee of Ministers’ Human Rights meetings, and it is not expected that they will participate in the foreseeable future.

4.         In this connection, it is noteworthy that on 11 June 2022 a new law entered into force in the Russian Federation regarding the execution of judgments. It stated that, because of the “procedurally incorrect exclusion” of the Russian Federation from the Council of Europe, the Committee of Ministers cannot insist upon the obligations on Russia flowing from the Council of Europe’s legal instruments, with the consequence that judgments of the European Court which became final after 15 March 2022 shall not be enforced, nor shall they serve as a ground for the reopening of proceedings. Just satisfaction awarded may be paid until 1 January 2023 for judgments which became final before 15 March 2022. However, payment will be made in roubles and only to bank accounts in Russia.

5.         At its 1436^th meeting (June 2022) (DH), the Committee examined a previous information note prepared by the DEJ on proposals  for a possible strategy regarding the supervision of the execution of cases pending against the Russian Federation and adopted decision CM/Del/Dec(2022)1436/A2a.[1]

In that decision, the Committee decided to resume consideration of this issue at one of its forthcoming meetings. This paper is intended to assist in that consideration.

II.         Current situation of cases pending execution

6.         There are currently 2,227 cases pending against the Russian Federation under the supervision of the Committee of Ministers, which the Russian Federation is required to implement. The breakdown is as follows:

• Cases under enhanced supervision: 1,223 (48 groups)
• Cases under standard supervision: 863
• New cases: 191

7.         Since 16 March 2022, the European Court has continued delivering judgments in cases against the Russian Federation, finding violations on a wide range of Convention articles. Among the important leading judgments adopted are the judgments in the case of Ecodefence and Others, on the application of the Foreign Agents Act to NGOs, and Taganrog LRO and Others, on the measures taken against Jehovah’s witnesses.^[2]

8.         The Committee has continued classifying new cases (242 since 16 March 2022, including the 81 cases proposed for classification at the December 2022 DH meeting) and has examined a total of 18 cases at its June, September and December DH meetings, on the basis of notes and draft decisions prepared by the Secretariat.

9.         It is not proposed to alter this approach at the present time. Through continuing to adopt decisions and interim resolutions the Committee can continue underlining the obligation on the Russian Federation to execute the Court’s judgments.

III.        Closer co-operation with civil society and other international organisations

10.       In the absence of communication from the authorities, information provided by the NGOs remains a vital resource to enable the Committee to keep up to date with the situation in the Russian Federation. On 14 October 2022 an online exchange was held between staff in the DEJ and a number of Russia-based NGOs, to explore how to maintain and increase cooperation with civil society in relation to the issues raised by Russian cases pending before the Committee.

11.       To assist it in its function under Article 46 § 2 of the Convention with respect to cases against Russia, the Committee might wish to engage in a similar exchange of views with relevant NGOs in relation to the situation in the Russian Federation, as well as any relevant NGOs from the Republic of Moldova dealing with Convention complaints from people living in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova. The Secretariat could be instructed to make more detailed proposals in this respect with a view to holding such an exchange early in 2023.

12.       The Russian Federation remains a member of the United Nations Organisation and a party to a number of UN human rights instruments with their own monitoring mechanisms. Some of these bodies are seized of issues that are also raised by the European Court cases and that are pending for execution. For example, enforced disappearances in Chechnya and the failure to investigate these or to search for missing persons, some of the central issues followed by the Committee in the Khashiev group of cases, also falls within the remit of the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNGWEID). The deficiencies in the protection provided to women against domestic violation, followed by the Committee in the Volodina group of cases, also falls within the remit of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Better synergies with such bodies could provide the Committee with more up-to-date information and also, possibly, alternative channels for the implementation of measures required for the execution of ECHR cases. The Secretariat could be instructed to enhance its contacts with the relevant UN bodies and report back to the Committee in the context of the cases concerned.

IV.        Effective communication of information to the public and register of outstanding obligations

13.       In the absence of communication and cooperation from the respondent State, it is particularly important to find effective ways to keep applicants and the public updated about the execution process in respect of cases against the Russian Federation. To this end, the DEJ has been actively using its website and social media accounts to publish separate news items in Russian, as well as the two official languages of the Council of Europe, on the Committee’s decision to continue examining Russian cases; decisions and interim resolutions adopted during the DH meetings in Russian cases; practical information on postal services; and requests for information from applicants on just satisfaction payments.[3] 

14.       On the DEJ’s website information and statistics concerning cases against the Russian Federation, as a non-member state, are presented separately. It is proposed to supplement this information with two documents, prominently displayed, which will make it possible immediately to ascertain the nature and extent of the Russian Federation’s outstanding obligations under the European Convention.

15.       The first such document could be a general information document setting out the individual and general measures needed for the effective implementation of all pending Russian cases, whether classified under the enhanced or the standard supervision tracks.

16.       Secondly, it is proposed to create a register of outstanding just satisfaction awards, periodically updated to show the amount of default interest accrued.[4] Priority in the creation of this register could be given to the just satisfaction owing in inter-state cases.

V.         Possible closure of cases

17.       At its last discussion on the strategy to be adopted in Russian cases in June, the Committee expressed the view that cases that were ready for closure would still continue to be submitted to the Committee with the corresponding draft final resolutions for adoption at the DH meetings. Since February 2022, three cases have accordingly been closed based on an action report and on payment information previously provided by the authorities.[5]

18.       Under the working methods, closure of a case is only possible after receipt of an action report from the relevant authorities (or information on payment for the cases of friendly settlements without other undertakings). The Committee is invited to consider whether, in the current circumstances, it wishes to close cases against Russia where no action report or other information has been submitted by the authorities, but where it is clear either from publicly available information or from submissions from applicants or NGOs that the required measures have been taken. Very few cases are likely to meet these criteria. If the Committee does wish to proceed in this manner, the Secretariat could include a summary of the measures known to have been taken in the draft final resolution.

VI.        Stock-taking and future strategy

19.       The Secretariat intends to carry out a full stock-taking of all the pending cases, for the purpose of the information document mentioned in § 15, and also with a view to regrouping the cases along broad thematic lines. Once this work is completed, the Committee might wish to revisit its strategy as regards the examination of Russian cases; in particular, it might wish at that point to consider adopting more general decisions dealing with larger groups of cases.