er stated inter alia:
"(...) Remedies following a "pilot" judgment
13. When a judgment which points to structural or general deficiencies in national law or practice ("pilot case") has been delivered and a large number of applications to the Court concerning the same problem ("repetitive cases") are pending or likely to be lodged, the respondent state should ensure that potential applicants have, where appropriate, an effective remedy allowing them to apply to a competent national authority, which may also apply to current applicants. Such a rapid and effective remedy would enable them to obtain redress at national level, in line with the principle of subsidiarity of the Convention system.
14. The introduction of such a domestic remedy could also significantly reduce the Court's workload. While prompt execution of the pilot judgment remains essential for solving the structural problem and thus for preventing future applications on the same matter, there may exist a category of people who have already been affected by this problem prior to its resolution. (...)
16. In particular, further to a pilot judgment in which a specific structural problem has been found, one alternative might be to adopt an ad hoc approach, whereby the state concerned would assess the appropriateness of introducing a specific remedy or widening an existing remedy by legislation or by judicial interpretation. (...)
18. When specific remedies are set up following a pilot case, governments should speedily inform the Court so that it can take them into account in its treatment of subsequent repetitive cases. (...)"
2. Parliamentary Assembly
43. In Resolution 1516 (2006) on implementation of the European Court's judgments, adopted on 2 October 2006, the Parliamentary Assembly noted with grave concern the continuing existence in several states of major structural deficiencies which cause large numbers of repetitive findings of violations of the Convention and represent a serious danger to the rule of law in the states concerned. The Assembly listed among those deficiencies some major shortcomings in the judicial organisation and procedures in the Russian Federation, including chronic non-enforcement of domestic judicial decisions delivered against the State (see paragraph 10.2). The Assembly urged the authorities of the States concerned, including the Russian Federation, to resolve the issues of particular importance mentioned in the resolution and to give this action top political priority.
44. In the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, the rapporteur, Mr Erik Jurgens, called for an urgent solution to the above-mentioned problems as they affect a very large number of people in Russia. He also warned that the influx of numerous clone cases in the Court was likely to undermine the effectiveness of the Convention mechanism (Doc. 11020). He further stated:
"58. The Rapporteur welcomes the frank and open position of most of the Russian officials and institutions he met in Moscow as well as their clear understanding that the above problems put at stake the effectiveness of the Russian judicial system, and indeed, of the State as a whole. It is perhaps indicative that especially the presidents of the Constitutional Court and of the Supreme Court showed a very constructive attitude, as both of them recognized the problems and encouraged the Rapporteur in his endeavours to help find a solution for them.
59. The authorities provided assurances that the most important problems would be addressed as a matter of priority and that appropriate steps would be taken to ensure rapid adoption of reforms required by the European Court's judgments.
60. The Russian officials' clear willingness to come to grips with the aforementioned important problems is most welcome. The Rapporteur stresses that the complex
> 1 2 3 ... 40 41 42 ... 59 60 61
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
