Dzelili v Germany - 65745/01 [2011] ECHR 1641 (08 August 2011)

BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!

(Application No. 65745/01, judgment of 10 November 2005, final on 10 February 2006)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);

Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;

Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the court concerns the excessive length of the applicant’s detention on remand (violation of Article 5, paragraph 3) (see details in Appendix);

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;

Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Having satisfied itself that the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment and the VAT required (see details in Appendix),

Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate:

- of individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and

DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and

The case concerns the excessive length of the applicant’s detention on remand, which began with his arrest in 1996 and ended in 2001 with the Regional Court’s judgment at first instance; thus lasting for 4 years and 8 months (violation of Article 5§3).

The European Court found that the judicial authorities had failed to act with the necessary diligence in the conduct of proceedings. Delays were mainly attributable to the Oldenburg Regional Court, which failed to find replacements for lay judges absent on sick-leave and required the holding of a new trial. Furthermore, the proceedings, once resumed, were not conducted swiftly. The court held on average less than four hearings a month, without making an effort to summon witnesses in a more efficient way.

The European Court held that the finding of a violation constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage. It noted in particular that the domestic courts had reduced the applicant’s sentence from 9 years to 6 and a half years taking account of and explicitly acknowledging the excessive length of his detention on remand and of the ensuing criminal proceedings. The applicant was released after serving his sentence.

Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.

The European Court, referring to its judgment in the parallel case concerning an accomplice of the applicant (see Cevizovic, closed by Final Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)120, adopted on 31 October 2007), found that “the competent court should have fixed a tighter hearing schedule in order to speed up the proceedings”. As the violation at issue does not amount to a structural problem, the publication and dissemination of the Court’s judgment should prevent similar violations. For this purpose, the Court’s judgment was sent out by letter of the Government Agent of 23 November 2005 to the domestic courts and justice authorities concerned. All judgments of the Court against Germany are publicly available via the website of the Federal Ministry of Justice (www.bmj.de, Themen: Menschenrechte, EGMR), which provides a direct link to the European Court’s website for judgments in German (www.coe.int/T/D/Menschenrechtsgerichtshof/Dokumente_auf_Deutsch/).

The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that these measures will prevent similar violations and that Germany has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

1 Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 14 September 2011 at the 1120th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies

Pecuniary damage	Non-pecuniary damage	Costs and expenses	Total
-	-	2 176 EUR	2 176 EUR
Paid on 20/03/2006

	[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Dzelili v Germany - 65745/01 [2011] ECHR 1641 (08 August 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/1641.html Cite as: [2011] ECHR 1641