Ministers' Deputies
CM Documents
CM(2000)185 (Restricted) 28 November 2000
————————————————
735 Meeting, 20 December 2000
4 Human rights
4.2 Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH)
Report of the 49th meeting (Strasbourg, 3-6 October 2000)
————————————————
List of points discussed and decisions taken
1. The Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) held its 49th meeting in the Human Rights Building in Strasbourg from 3 to 6 October 2000, with Mr Guido RAIMONDI (Italy) in the Chair. The participants are listed in Appendix I. The agenda, as adopted, is reproduced in Appendix II.
The detailed report of the meeting (CDDH (2000) 25 and Addendum) can be obtained from the Human Rights Directorate.
2. At this meeting, the CDDH, in particular:
i. continued discussing the preparation of the European Ministerial Conference on Human Rights (Rome, 3-4 November 2000) and adopted the draft political texts to be submitted to the Conference (CDDH(2000)25 Addendum);
- adopted draft Rules of procedure for the application of Article 46 paragraph 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (see Appendix III to this report);
- Bureau of the CDDH: 8-9 February 2001
- 51st Meeting of the CDDH: 27 February-2 March 2001
- 7th Meeting of the DH-S-AC: 28-30 March 2001
- 49th Meeting of the DH-PR: 25-27 April 2001
- 27th Meeting of the DH-DEV: 20-22 June 2001 (instead of 22-24 November 2000 as initially planned).
vii. adopted this report as a whole.
* * *
APPENDICES
I. List of participants.......................................................................................................... 5
II. Agenda.......................................................................................................................... 11
III. Draft rules for the application of Article 46 paragraph 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights 13
IV. Terms of reference of the Group of Specialists on access
to official information (DH-S-AC)............................................................................... 19
V. Exchange of letters between the President of the CDDH and the President of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the publication and dissemination of judgments of the Court 21
* * *
Appendix I
LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS /LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
ALBANIA / ALBANIE :Mr Riza PODA, Government Agent, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
ANDORRA/ANDORRE: /
AUSTRIA/AUTRICHE Ms Ingrid SIESS-SCHERZ, Head of Division for International Affairs and General Administrative Affairs
BELGIUM / BELGIQUE: M. Jan LATHOUWERS, Chef de Service, Ministère de la Justice , Direction générale de la législation pénale et des droits de l'homme, Service des Droits de l’Homme
BULGARIA / BULGARIE Mr Andrey TEHOV, Acting Director of Human Rights, Directorate of Human Rights, Ministry of Foreign Affairs / Ms Ludmila BOJKOVA, Chargé d'Affaires, Permanent Representation of Bulgaria to the Council of Europe
CROATIA / CROATIE: Mr Branko SOČANAC, Head of Human Rights Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
CYPRUS / CHYPRE Ms Maro CLERIDES TSIAPPAS, Senior Counsel for the Republic, The Law Office of the Republic of Cyprus
CZECH REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUEMr Karel HEJC, Director, Human Rights Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
DENMARK/DANEMARK Mr Jon Fridrik KJØLBRO, Head of Section, Ministry of Justice
ESTONIA/ESTONIE Mrs Mai HION, 1st Secretary, Division of Human Rights, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
FINLAND / FINLANDE Mr Arto KOSONEN, Director, Co-Agent for the Government, Legal Department, Ministry for Foreign Affairs
FRANCE/FRANCE Mme Michèle DUBROCARD, Sous-Directrice des Droits de l'Homme, Direction des Affaires juridiques, Ministère des Affaires étrangères / M. Régis DE GOUTTES, Avocat Général à la Cour de Cassation
GEORGIA/GEORGIE Mr Mamuka JGENTI, Head Council of Europe and Human Rights Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
GERMANY / ALLEMAGNE Mr Klaus STOLTENBERG, Agent of Human Rights, Bundesministerium der Justiz
GREECE / GRECE:Mr Emmanuel ROUCOUNAS, Professor, Academy of Athens
HUNGARY/HONGRIE Mr Lipot HÖLTZL, Deputy Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice
ICELAND/ISLANDE: Mr Jon THORS, Director of Civil Affairs, Ministry of Justice/Ms Björg THORARENSEN, Director of Police and Judicial Affairs, Ministry of Justice
IRELAND/IRLANDE Mr James GAWLEY, Legal Adviser to the Council of Europe and Human Rights sections, Department of Foreign Affairs
ITALY / ITALIE : M. Guido RAIMONDI (Chairman of the CDDH/ Président du CDDH), Cour de Cassation, Palais de Justice/M. Pietro MARTELLO, Juge de Cour d'Appel, Ministère de la Justice
LATVIA / LETTONIE :Ms Kristine MALINOVSKA; Director of Legal Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
LIECHTENSTEIN: Apologised/Excusé
LITHUANIA / LITUANIE: Ms Sigute JAKSTONYTE, Deputy Director, International Law and International Treaties Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
LUXEMBOURG: Mme Brigitte KONZ, Vice-présidente du tribunal d'arrondissement de Luxembourg
MALTA / MALTE: Dr. Lawrence QUINTANO, Senior Counsel for the Republic, Ministry for Justice
REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA / REPUBLIQUE DE MOLDAVIE: Mr Oleg UNGUREANU, Director of the General Department for European Integration of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS : Mrs Welment van AARDENNE, Acting Head Human Rights Division, Human Rights and Peace Building Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs/ Mr Roeland BÖCKER, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
NORWAY/NORVEGE:Ms Tonje MEINICH, Legal Adviser, Legislation Department, Royal Norwegian Ministry of Justice
POLAND/POLOGNE: Mr Krzystof DRZEWICKI, Minister Councellor, Deputy Permanent Representative of Poland to the Council of Europe, Agent of the Government before control organs of the ECHR/Ms Renata KOWALSKA, Legal Adviser, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
PORTUGAL: M. Antonio HENRIQUES GASPAR, Procureur Général adjoint, Procuradoria Geral da Republica
ROMANIA / ROUMANIE : Mme Brandusa PREDESCU, Directeur, Direction Conseil de l’Europe et Droits de l’Homme, 16, Allée Modrogan, Ministère des affaires étrangères
RUSSIAN FEDERATION / FEDERATION DE RUSSIE: Mr Youri BOYCHENKO, Head of the Unit, Department of International Humanitarian Cooperation and Human Rights, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
SAN MARINO / SAINT-MARIN
SLOVAK REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUE :Ms Eva KIMLIKOVA, Deputy Director, Department of Human Rights, Hlboká cesta 2, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
SLOVENIA/SLOVENIE: Mr Andraz ZIDAR, Third Secretary at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
SPAIN/ESPAGNE: M. Francisco Javier BORREGO BORREGO, Avocat d’État, Sous-Directeur Général, Chef du service juridique des Droits de l’Homme, Ministère de la Justice
SWEDEN/SUEDE:Ms Eva JAGANDER, Director, Ministry for Foreign Affairs (FMR)/Ms Ylva OSVALD, Legal Adviser, Ministry for Foreign Affairs
SWITZERLAND/SUISSE: M. Philippe BOILLAT, Sous-Directeur, Division des Affaires internationales, Office fédéral de la justice
"THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA/"L'EX-REPUBLIQUE YOUGOSLAVE DE MACEDOINE s Elizabeta GORGIEVA, Head of Human Rights and Minority Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
TURKEY/TURQUIE Mme Deniz AKÇAY, Adjoint au Représentant permanent de la Turquie auprès du Conseil de l’Europe /Ms Sayin Banur ÖZAYDIN, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
UKRAINE Ms Larysa MYRONENKO, Head of the OSCE and Council of Europe Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
UNITED KINGDOM/ROYAUME-UNI: Mr Martin EATON, Deputy Legal Adviser, Foreign and Commonwealth Office
* * *
PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY / ASSEMBLEE PARLEMENTAIRE
* * *
EUROPEAN COMMISSION / COMMISSION EUROPEENNE Apologised/excusé
* * *
OBSERVERS/OBSERVATEURS
HOLY SEE/SAINT-SIEGE M. Giorgio FILIBECK, Conseil Pontifical "Justice et Paix"
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA/ETATS-UNIS D'AMERIQUE: Apologised/Excusé
CANADA
JAPAN/JAPON: Mr Yoshihide ASAKURA, Consul of Japan
MEXICO/MEXIQUE Mr Héctor ROMERO, Permanent Observer of Mexico to the Council of Europe/Mr Alèjandro GARCIA-MORENO, Deputy Observer of Mexico to the Council of Europe
* * *
REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA/REPUBLIQUE D'ARMENIE
REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN: Mr Chingiz ASKAROV, First Secretary of the Representation of the Republic of Azerbaidjan/Mr Azad JAFAROV, Desk Officer of the Treaty and Legal Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
REPUBLIC OF BELARUS/REPUBLIQUE DE BELARUS Mr Stanislav OGURTSOV, Head of the Department of Humanitarian Cooperation and Human Rights, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
FEDERATION OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA/FEDERATION DE BOSNIE ET HERZEGOVINE
Mr Anto CAVAR, Counsellor, Ministry of Justice
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR-OSCE)/Bureau des institutions démocratiques et des droits de l'homme (BIDDH-OSCE) Apologised/Excusé
Amnesty International Mme Sylvie KLEINBERG/Mme Claudia SCIOTTI, Représentante, membre d’Amnesty International
International Commission of Jurists / Commission Internationale deJuristes
International Federation of Human Rights / Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme
M. Pierre BOULAY , Représentant de la FIDH auprès du Conseil de l'Europe
Chair of the Committee of Experts for the Improvement of Procedures for the Protection of Human Rights (DH-PR) / Président du Comité d'Experts pour l'amélioration des procédures de protection des droits de l'homme (DH-PR)
Mr Carl Henrik EHRENKRONA, High Court Judge, Vice-Chairman of Chamber, Svea Court of Appeal
* * *
SECRETARIAT
Directorate General of Human Rights - DG II / Direction Générale des Droits de l'Homme - DG II
M. Pierre-Henri IMBERT, Director General of Human Rights/Directeur Général des Droits de l'Homme / Ms Jane DINSDALE, Director of Human Rights/Directrice des Droits de l’Homme / Mr Jeroen SCHOKKENBROEK, Head of the Human Rights Law and Policy Development Division/Chef de la Division du développement du droit et de la politique des droits de l'homme / M. Alfonso DE SALAS, Head of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Unit / Chef de l'Unité de la coopération intergouvernementale, Secretary of the Committee/Secrétaire du Comité / Mr Philipp MITTELBERGER, Programme Adviser/Conseiller de Programme / Mrs Katherine ANDERSON-SCHOLL, Administrative Assistant/Assistante administrative / Mme Michèle COGNARD, Administrative Assistant /Assistante administrative / Mlle Haldia MOKEDDEM, Administrative Assistant /Assistante administrative / Mlle Virginie HECK, Legal Assistant/Juriste assistante / Mlle Rupa MITRA, Lawyer/Juriste, Trainee/stagiaire
Interpreters/interprètes: Mme Jennifer GRIFFITH / Mr Robert SZYMANSKI/ Mr Amath FAYE
Mme Shéhérazade HOYER
Appendix II
Items 1 and 2: Opening of the meeting, adoption of the agenda and order of business
Item 3: Organisation of the European Ministerial Conference on Human Rights and the Commemorative Ceremony of the 50th anniversary of the European Convention on Human Rights (Rome, 3-4 November 2000)
a. Substantive issues
Item 4: European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights
Item 5: Working methods of the CDDH
Item 6: State of work of the committees of experts answerable to the CDDH
a. DH-DEV
b. DH-PR
c. DH-MIN
d. DH-S-AC
Item 7: Elections
Item 8: Questions which could be placed on the Agenda of the next meeting
(depending on the decisions that will be taken at the Rome Conference)
Item 9: Dates of the next meetings
Item 10: Other business
* * *
Appendix III
Draft rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2,
of the European Convention on Human Rights
_____________
Rule 1
General provisions
a. The Committee of Ministers’ supervision of the execution of judgments of the Court will in principle take place at special human rights meetings, the agenda of which are public.
b. Unless otherwise provided in the present rules, the general rules of procedure of the meetings of the Committee of Ministers and of the Ministers’ Deputies shall apply to the examination of cases under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention.
c. If the chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers is held by the representative of a state which is a party to a case referred to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that representative shall relinquish the chairmanship during any discussion of that case.
Rule 2
Inscription of cases on the agenda
When a judgment is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the case shall be inscribed on the agenda of the Committee without delay.
Rule 3
Information to the Committee of Ministers on
the measures taken in order to abide by the judgment
a. When, in a judgment transmitted to the Committee of Ministers in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Court has decided that there has been a violation of the Convention or its protocols and/or has awarded just satisfaction to the injured party under Article 41 of the Convention, the Committee shall invite the State concerned to inform it of the measures which the State has taken in consequence of the judgment, having regard to its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
b. When supervising the execution of a judgment by the respondent State, pursuant to Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Committee of Ministers will examine whether:
- any just satisfaction awarded by the Court has been paid, including as the case may be default interest;
and, if required, and taking into account the discretion of the State concerned to choose the means necessary to comply with the judgment, whether
- individual measures[1] have been taken to ensure that the injured party is put, as far as possible, in the same situation as that party enjoyed prior to the violation of the Convention;
- general measures[2] have been adopted, preventing new violations similar to that or those found or putting an end to continuing violations.
Rule 4
Control intervals
a. Until the State concerned has provided information on the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court or concerning possible individual measures, the case shall be placed on the agenda of each human rights meeting of the Committee of Ministers, unless the Committee decides otherwise.
b. If the State concerned informs the Committee of Ministers that it is not yet in a position to inform the Committee that the general measures necessary to ensure compliance with the judgment have been taken, the case shall be placed again on the agenda of a meeting of the Committee of Ministers taking place no more than six months later, unless the Committee decides otherwise; the same rule shall apply when this period expires and for each subsequent period.
Rule 5
Access to information
Without prejudice to the confidential nature of Committee of Ministers’ deliberations, in accordance with Article 21 of the Statute of the Council of Europe, information provided by the State to the Committee of Ministers in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention and the documents relating thereto shall be accessible to the public, unless the Committee decides otherwise in order to protect legitimate public or private interests. In deciding such matters, the Committee of Ministers shall take into account reasoned requests by the State or States concerned, as well as the interest of an injured party or a third party not to disclose their identity.
Rule 6
Communications to the Committee of Ministers
a. The Committee of Ministers is entitled to consider any communication from the injured party with regard to the payment of the just satisfaction or the taking of individual measures.
b. The Secretariat shall bring such communications to the attention of the Committee of Ministers.
Rule 7
Interim resolutions
In the course of its supervision of the execution of a judgment, the Committee of Ministers may adopt interim resolutions, notably in order to provide information on the state of progress of the execution or, where appropriate, to express concern and/or to make relevant suggestions with respect to the execution.
Rule 8
Final resolution
When the Committee of Ministers has established that the State concerned has taken all the necessary measures to abide by the judgment, it shall adopt a resolution concluding that its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention have been exercised.
* * *
Sir,
At their 653rd meeting (16-17th December 1998), the Ministers’ Deputies adopted ad hoc terms of reference for the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH) and fixed the completion date of these terms of reference at 31st December 2000. According to these terms, the Steering Committee was entrusted the task of preparing a revised version of the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of former Articles 32 and 54 of the European Convention on Human Rights, bearing in mind, in particular, the new situation created by the entry into force of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention.
I have the pleasure of enclosing, herewith, the new rules drawn up by the Steering Committee in completion of the above-mentioned terms of reference.
The new rules aim at codifying existing practice within the Committee of Ministers for the application of Article 46(2) of the Convention, and they are designed for the purpose of complying with the role of the Committee of Ministers under Protocol No. 11.
In addition a new rule, Rule 5, on access to information has been introduced. This new rule is intended to correspond to the policy of transparency within the Council of Europe of today. It applies, however, only to the examination of cases under Article 46 of the Convention and is not intended to derogate from the general rule regarding the confidentiality of the Committee of Ministers’ deliberations laid down in Article 21 of the Statute of the Council of Europe.
Yours faithfully,
Guido RAIMONDI
Chairman of the CDDH
The Chairman of the Committee of Ministers
Mr. Pietro Ercole Ago
Permanent Representative of Italy to the Council of Europe
Annexe IV
Terms of reference of the Group of Specialists
on access to official information
(DH-S-AC)
Terms of reference
1. Name of Committee:
Group of Specialists on access to official information (DH-S-AC)
2. Type of Committee:
Committee of experts
3. Source of terms of reference:
Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH)
4. Terms of reference:
Under the authority of the CDDH, the Group of Specialists on access to official information (DH-S-AC) shall prepare a draft recommendation embodying basic principles on the right of access of the public to information held by public authorities. The draft recommendation shall be accompanied by an explanatory memorandum.
In carrying out its terms of reference, the DH-S-AC shall have due regard notably to Recommendation No. R (81) 19 on access to information held by public authorities and to legislative developments in the field of access to official information both in the member States and at European level.
At the close of its work, the DH-S-AC shall draw up a final activity report for the attention of the CDDH. This report shall also present suggestions on the future activities which could be undertaken by the CDDH in this field, further to the possible adoption of a recommendation by the Committee of Ministers.
5. Membership of the Committee:
The Group of Specialists shall be composed as follows:
Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Russian Federation, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom, as well as three experts to be appointed by the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ).
The budget of the Council of Europe will bear the travel and subsistence expenses of twelve specialists for attendance at meetings of the Group. Other member States expressing an interest in the work of the Group may designate, at their own expense, specialists to participate in meetings of the Group.
The European Commission may send representatives, without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses, to meetings of the Group.
The non-governmental organisation Article XIX may send a representative to attend meetings of the Group in a observer capacity, without the right to vote or defrayal of expenses.
6. Working structures and methods:
In carrying out its terms of reference, the Group of Specialists shall consult all parties concerned by its work and by all appropriate means. In particular, the Group of Specialists may organise hearings and written consultations. The Group of Specialists may also have recourse to consultants.
7. Duration:
These terms of reference shall come to an end on 31 December 2001.
Appendix V
Exchange of letters between the President of the CDDH and the President of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the publication and dissemination
of judgments of the Court
Strasbourg, 20 June 2000
Mr President,
I have been asked to write and inform you and the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers of certain concerns relating to the accessibility of judgments and decisions of the Court, expressed by the Committee of Experts for the Improvement of Procedures for the Protection of Human Rights (DH-PR - one of the sub-committees of the Steering Committee for Human Rights) at their last meeting in April 2000.
During this meeting the DH-PR held an exchange of views on the various problems linked to the publication and dissemination of the judgments of the Court. It appeared that a number of experts, some of whom were agents of their governments before the Court, had encountered difficulties in having access to the Court’s judgments and, in particular, also to the inadmissibility decisions of the Court, even those concerning their own country. Concerns voiced related notably to the absence of rapid “paper” publication of judgments and of tools allowing easy identification of important cases (the Court’s information note is for example issued with important delays) and the absence of translations of judgments (important judgments are not translated, where necessary, into the language of the respondent State and some judgments are not translated into the other official language of the Council of Europe).
Given the fundamental importance of efficient publication and dissemination of judgments of the Court, the experts of the DH-PR expressed the wish that I, in my capacity as Chairman of the Steering Committee for Human Rights, bring their concerns to your attention for examination and possible follow-up, and to the attention of the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers so as to permit the Committee of Ministers to include a strengthening of the Court’s resources on these points in the budgetary programme for the next year.
I attach for your convenience a copy of the meeting report of the aforementioned meeting (document DH-PR (00) 6) and I would like to draw your attention in particular to paragraphs 40 – 45.
I would be most grateful if you could consider to take the appropriate measures to deal with these questions.
I thank you in advance.
Please accept the assurance of my highest consideration.
Guido RAIMONDI
Chairman of the CDDH
The President of the European Court of Human Rights
European Court of Human Rights
Le Président
The President
Strasbourg, 19 September 2000
Dear Chairman,
Publication and dissemination of judgments of the Court
I am writing in response to your letter of 20 June 2000, in which you draw my attention to certain concerns of the Committee of Experts for the Improvement of Procedures for the Protection of Human Rights (DH-PR) relating to the accessibility of judgments and decisions of the Court.
I can assure you that the Court shares these concerns and is acutely aware of the difficulties encountered by the experts, and indeed by the public at large, in obtaining the Court’s case-law and in identifying those cases which are of particular importance. Regrettably, virtually all these difficulties arise out of a lack of sufficient resources.
I am pleased to inform you that an exchange of views took place on Friday, 8 September, between the DH-PR and representatives of the Court, namely Mr Mahoney, Deputy Registrar, and Mr Naismith, head of the Information and Publications Unit, in the course of which the Court’s information and publication policy was explained and a number of issues were clarified. A summary of the points covered is given below.
1. access to the Court’s case-law
. provisional version of judgments (roneotype) – the cost of sending out the provisional version of judgments free of charge to several thousand recipients had become an intolerable burden even before the entry into force of Protocol No. 11, but with the anticipated increase in the number of judgments (the Court has delivered over 600 in less than two years, compared to under 1,000 delivered in a forty year period by the old Court) it was obvious from the outset that this service could not be continued; consequently, there is no systematic diffusion of this version outside the Court, except to the Permanent Representations, which receive all judgments; this decision was taken in the light of the fact that every judgment is made available on the Court’s Web site (via the HUDOC database) on the day of delivery;
./.
Mr Guido RAIMONDI
Chairman of the CDDH
. Reports of Judgments and Decisions (the official publication of the case-law of the Court) – again in the light of the anticipated number of judgments, as well as the fact that a large number of these were likely to be without any legal interest (in particular, the length of proceedings cases), the Court considered that systematic publication of every judgment was neither desirable
nor practicable; it took the view that making judgments available on its Web site was sufficient “publication” to comply with the obligation set out in Article 44(3) of the Convention and that the official series could therefore be limited to a selection of the most important judgments and admissibility decisions;
. information notes – since it was appreciated that the large volume of judgments and decisions being delivered by the Court would make it increasingly difficult to keep up with case-law developments (for the judges and the registry as much as for the agents and the public), the Commission’s model of issuing a regular information note was adopted; these monthly notes include summaries of selected cases (wider than the selection for publication, and mentioning also the communication of applications as well as judgments and decisions) and are the only document which the Court now sends out via its mailing list; they are also put on the Court’s Web site;
. inadmissibility decisions – in October 1999 the Registrar invited the Government Agents to indicate whether they wished to receive on a systematic basis the decisions concerning their country declaring applications inadmissible de plano (excluding committee decisions – the Agents receive in any event decisions in communicated cases); around one half of the Agents took advantage of this offer and the relevant decisions have been dispatched at regular intervals since the beginning of 2000.
2. rapid paper publication
. it was felt appropriate for the new permanent Court to elaborate its own publication policy and, in this connection, to issue an international call for tenders with a view to finding the best publisher for the official series; unfortunately, it was not possible to finalise the terms of the call for tenders until the judges had been appointed and the Court had had an opportunity to give some indication of its preferences; nevertheless, the call for tenders was issued in February 1999 and, after the usual rather lengthy process, during which the Court established a Publications Committee whose duties included preparing a report on the offers received, the Tenders Board authorised the Court in September 1999 to enter into negotiations with the previous publisher, Carl Heymanns Verlag, whose offer appeared the most attractive; these negotiations took place in November and December 1999 and a contract was signed in February 2000;
. during 1999, the Court’s Information and Publications Unit had proceeded with the preparation of the Reports, the first volume of which was transmitted to the publisher immediately after the conclusion of the contract; a further four of the nine volumes for 1999 have also been sent to the publisher; there have been a number of teething problems of a technical nature (the format of the series having changed from the old presentation) and publication has been delayed because the Court is keen for the series to be a quality publication, but it is hoped that the first few volumes for 1999 will appear in print in the near future, to be followed by the others and by the first of the 2000 volumes in the first half of next year;
.../...
. the Reports will continue to be bilingual, but the two texts will be presented consecutively rather than in parallel, since the latter option increases costs significantly; the text (or sometimes an extract) will be accompanied by (i) a very brief indication of the subject-matter, (ii) key concepts, given under the relevant Convention articles, and (iii) a summary of the facts and the law; case-law cited by the Court will also be indicated and an index volume will be produced at the end of each year;
. the contract with the publisher is for a three-year period, the Court’s intention being to study the feasibility of taking over all aspects of publication itself (with the possible exception of printing and binding).
3. identification of important cases
. various concerns have been voiced about the difficulty in sifting out important and interesting cases from the mass of case-law produced by the Court; the information notes are intended to fulfil this role, but there have been unfortunate – and increasing – delays in making them available to the public, due entirely to insufficient resources for translation, particularly on the English side; with a view to making the information available more speedily, it is now the Court’s intention to put the original language only version on its Web site as soon as it is available (normally one week to ten days after the end of the month it covers), as an interim measure pending receipt of the translations;
. in order to assist with the identification of leading case-law, the Court will be putting on its Web site in the near future (i) a chronological list of judgments since January 1999, giving a brief indication of the subject-matter, and (ii) a list of the judgments and decisions selected (or proposed) for publication, which will in principle be the most important cases;
. as far as the database is concerned, the Court is looking into the possibility of “flagging” important judgments so that they can be easily identified by the user, who would also have the option of restricting his or her result-list to such cases, thus reducing the volume of material to be gone through;
. finally, the Court is keen to use “agent technology”, that is, a system which will allow the user (probably by subscription) to request HUDOC to send by e-mail the judgments and/or decisions which interest him or her as they are entered into the database; for example, a subscriber would be able to ask for every new case concerning Article 10 to be sent automatically; such development will depend, however, on the availability of sufficient resources.
4. translation issues
. in view of the number of judgments delivered by the Court, systematic translation is simply precluded; the Court has therefore adopted the policy of translating only Grand Chamber judgments, which are dealt with bilingually, and those Chamber judgments (and, indeed, admissibility decisions) selected for publication;
. the absence of translations is particularly regrettable with regard to the database, since it implies that a monolingual user will find much of the material excluded from his or her research;
.../...
. as far as translation into non-official languages is concerned, it is clear in the light of the above that the Court has no possibility of doing or even supervising this.
I hope that these explanations have reassured the Committee that the Court is doing all in its power to make its important case-law accessible to the public. Additional action is, unfortunately, not within its power, but is dependent on further resources being made available. I am sure that you will impress this on the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers when the opportunity arises.
Yours sincerely,
Luzius WILDHABER
[1] For instance, the striking out of an unjustified criminal conviction from the criminal records, the granting of a residence permit or the re-opening of impugned domestic proceedings (see on this latter point Recommendation N°R (2000) 2 of the Committee of Ministers to the member States on the re-examination or reopening of certain cases at domestic level following judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, adopted on 19 January 2000 at the 694th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies).
[2] For instance, legislative or regulatory amendments, changes of case law or administrative practice or publication of the Court’s judgment in the language of the respondent State and its dissemination to the authorities concerned.