Главная страницаZaki.ru законы и право Поиск законов поиск по сайту Каталог документов каталог документов Добавить в избранное добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное




Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 15.01.2009 "Дело "Бурдов (Burdov) против Российской Федерации" (N 2)" [рус., англ.]





measures
136. The Court notes that the problems at the basis of the violations of Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 found in this case are large-scale and complex in nature. Indeed, they do not stem from a specific legal or regulatory provision or a particular lacuna in Russian law. They accordingly require the implementation of comprehensive and complex measures, possibly of a legislative and administrative character, involving various authorities at both federal and local level. Subject to monitoring by the Committee of Ministers, the respondent State remains free to choose the means by which it will discharge its legal obligation under Article 46 of the Convention, provided that such means are compatible with the conclusions set out in the Court's judgment (see Scozzari and Giunta, cited above, § 249).
137. The Court notes that the adoption of such measures has been thoroughly considered by the Committee of Ministers in cooperation with the Russian competent authorities (see decisions and documents cited in paragraphs 39 - 40 above). The Committee's decisions and documents show that although the implementation of the necessary measures is far from being completed, further actions are being considered or taken in this respect (see the main avenues outlined in paragraph 40 above). The Court notes that this process raises a number of complex legal and practical issues which go, in principle, beyond the Court's judicial function. It will thus abstain in these circumstances from indicating any specific general measure to be taken. The Committee of Ministers is better placed and equipped to monitor the necessary reforms to be adopted by Russia in this respect. The Court therefore leaves it to the Committee of Ministers to ensure that the Russian Federation, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention, adopts the necessary measures consistent with the Court's conclusions in the present judgment.
138. The Court observes, however, that the situation is different as regards the violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of effective domestic remedies. In accordance with Article 46 of the Convention, the Court's findings in paragraphs 101 - 117 above clearly require the setting up of an effective domestic remedy or a combination of remedies allowing adequate and sufficient redress to be granted to large numbers of people affected by the violations in question. It appears highly unlikely in the light of the Court's conclusions that such an effective remedy can be set up without changing the domestic legislation on certain specific points.
139. In this respect, the Court attaches considerable importance to the findings of the Russian Constitutional Court, which has invited Parliament since January 2001 to set up a procedure for compensation of damage arising, inter alia, from excessively lengthy proceedings. Of particular importance is the finding made by reference notably to Article 6 of the Convention that such compensation should not be conditional on the establishment of fault (see paragraph 32 - 33 above). The Court also welcomes the legislative initiative recently taken by the Supreme Court in this area and notes the bills tabled in Parliament on 30 September 2008 with a view to introducing remedies in respect on the violations in question (see paragraphs 34 - 36 above). The Court notes with interest the reference to the Convention standards as a basis for determining compensation for damage, and that the average amounts of compensation for delayed enforcement were calculated by reference to the Court's case-law (see paragraphs 35 and 36 above).
140. It is not, however, for the Court to assess the overall adequacy of the ongoing reform, nor to specify what would be the most appropriate way to set up the necessary domestic remedies (see Hutten-Czapska, cited above, § 239). The State may either amend the existing range of le



> 1 2 3 ... 56 57 58 59 ... 60 61

Поделиться:

Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.1469 с