CASE OF AKIMOVA AGAINST AZERBAIJAN

Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)70
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Akimova against Azerbaijan
 
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 April 2019 at the 1343rd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
 
 
Application No.
Case
Judgment of
Final on
19853/03
AKIMOVA
27/09/2007
09/10/2008
27/12/2007
09/10/2008
 
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 final judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee in this case and to the violation established;
 
Recalling the respondent State’s obligation, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:
 
- of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
 
Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with the above-mentioned obligation;
 
Having examined the information provided by the government indicating the measures adopted to give effect to the judgments (see Appendix);
 
Recalling that the question of the general measures required in response to the failure to execute final judicial decisions ordering the eviction of internally displaced persons unlawfully occupying apartments belonging to other persons, continues to be examined within the framework of the Mirzayev group (Application No. 50187/06);
 
Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted,
 
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
 
DECIDES to close the examination thereof.


Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)70
 
Information about the measures taken to comply with the judgment
in the Akimova case v. Azerbaijan
 
Case summary
 
The case concerns an interference with the applicant’s peaceful enjoyment of her possessions on account of a decision taken in 2005 by a Court of Appeal in which, while recognising that the applicant was the lawful tenant of a flat, it decided, without relying on any provision of the domestic legislation, to postpone the execution of an eviction order until the unlawful occupants, who had moved into the applicant’s flat in 1997, could go back to their region of origin, Nagorno-Karabakh (violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1).
 
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
 
a) Details of just satisfaction agreed under the friendly settlement reached
 
Name and application number
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
Paid on
Akimova
(19853/03)
AZN 10,000
AZN 10,000
06/11/2008
 
b) Other individual measures
 
Following the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of 21 January 2008, the applicant regained possession of her apartment on 14 March 2008. Consequently, no further individual measures are required.
 
II. General measures
 
The violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 resulted from the decision of the Court of Appeal to postpone the execution of an eviction order. The European Court found in the present case that the domestic courts did not rely on any domestic legal provision for postponing the execution of the eviction order (§ 45). Therefore, this violation was caused by the misapplication of domestic legislation by the Court of Appeal and does not require legislative measures. Moreover, the European Court has not delivered any other similar judgments against Azerbaijan. It therefore appears that the targeted dissemination of the Court’s judgment, which was done by the authorities in 2009, has proven to be a sufficient measure to avoid similar violations.
 
In addition, the present judgment was translated and published, as well as widely disseminated among judges and legal professionals. It was also included in the training curricula for judges and candidate judges. Lastly, it is also noted that the domestic legal system includes possibilities for requesting compensation for judicial errors in relation to both civil and criminal proceedings. No further general measures are thus required.
 
III.Conclusions of the respondent State
 
The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case and that these measures will prevent similar violations in the future. Azerbaijan has, therefore, complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy