As the implementation of the Court’s judgments still presents
many challenges, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers:
2.1 continue to use all available
means (including interim resolutions) to fulfil its tasks arising
under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
2.2 undertake further work to develop a clear toolkit for
assisting co-operation and increasing pressure on States, in order
to encourage them to take timely action to implement the judgments
of the European Court of Human Rights; this toolkit should include
a range of different measures and techniques that could potentially
be deployed, as required, in different situations depending on the seriousness
and complexity of the issue as well as on the type of barriers that
might exist to timely and effective implementation; such a toolkit
should be an evolving document to include new techniques and best
practice as experience develops; a creative approach should be applied
in terms of tools and bodies that might assist in these endeavours;
2.3 increase the focus and priority for implementing leading
cases, noting in particular that while significant progress has
been made in tackling repetitive cases – which has improved the
overall statistics – this is no substitute for addressing the underlying
root causes of a series of violations, through implementing the
leading cases; to this end more of a focus should be given to analysing
and publicising the barriers to implementing leading cases as well
as deploying the necessary tools to implement them successfully;
2.4 ensure that priority is given to tackling pockets of resistance
and particularly complex cases, including by providing guidance
and assistance to domestic authorities in the execution process
to address the root causes underlying a violation;
2.5 take action to ensure that all States have adequate, effective
national co-ordination mechanisms, with sufficient hierarchy and
resources to be able to implement judgments; this could include
the provision of expertise on the organisation of the workload and
any reforms required to ensure the correct levels of resourcing
and hierarchy in order to co-ordinate effectively the implementation
of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights;
2.6 consider developing new mechanisms to motivate and, if
need be, sanction States that fail to take timely action, including
by failing to supply information, especially where delays or obstacles
in execution were readily avoidable, for example by more effective
co-ordination; this could include using financing options from the
Council of Europe Development Bank to help to fund projects relevant
to the implementation of the Convention rights;
2.7 use the procedures provided for in Article 46, paragraphs
3 to 5, of the Convention, in the event of implementation of a judgment
encountering strong resistance from the respondent State; however, this
should continue to be done sparingly and in exceptional circumstances;
2.8 having regard to
Recommendation
2245 (2023) “The Reykjavik Summit of the Council of Europe –
United around values in the face of extraordinary challenges”, develop
further the options available to the Committee of Ministers and,
indeed, the Council of Europe as a whole, following a judgment of
the Court under Article 46, paragraph 4, of the Convention, with
the aim of ensuring respect for the rule of law and the Convention
system; such work should include careful consideration of the potential
role for the Assembly within such mechanisms, such as through the
complementary joint procedure;
2.9 ensure that thematic debates on the execution of the Court’s
judgments are carefully targeted and that participation is relevant,
including carefully selected external experts, where appropriate,
in order to have a meaningful debate on the topic with openness
to ideas for resolving difficult issues;
2.10 continue to improve synergies and make best use of all
available resources and organs within the Council of Europe, in
particular the Court and its Registry, the Assembly, the Secretary
General, the Commissioner for Human Rights, the Steering Committee
for Human Rights, the European Commission for Democracy through
Law (Venice Commission), the European Committee for the Prevention
of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT)
and the Human Rights Trust Fund;
2.11 ensure adequate resources for the Department for the Execution
of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, in light of
the significant workload of cases, the necessity of ensuring its
strong Convention and country-specific expertise in order to provide
assistance to the Committee of Ministers and the member States within
its mandate, and the importance of the timely implementation of judgments
for the Organisation;
2.12 further elaborate the modalities of its strategy for ensuring
the continued supervision over the execution of judgments pending
implementation in respect of the Russian Federation, as well as
those to be adopted in the future by the Court, within the limits
of its jurisdiction;
2.13 develop structured processes to regularly inform the Assembly
about judgments of the Court, the implementation of which reveals
complex or structural problems and requires legislative action;
2.14 engage in a process of dialogue with the Assembly to ensure
that the Assembly and the rapporteur for the implementation of the
judgments of the European Court of Human Rights can be in a position
to facilitate, as best as possible, the work of the Department for
the Execution of Judgments and the Committee of Ministers, for example
by organising conferences and exchanges with national parliaments,
where this could be useful to bolster domestic institutional capacity
for implementing judgments or where political engagement might be
helpful, such as where legislative or other significant reform is
needed to address a judgment;
2.15 as part of this process of dialogue with the Assembly,
establish a yearly communication of the Committee of Ministers to
the Assembly during a part-session, to set out the progress achieved
in the implementation of leading and other important cases; this
could be similar to the addresses of the Commissioner for Human
Rights to the Assembly when presenting his/her annual report;
2.16 to this end, pilot the organisation of country-specific
meetings between the Department for the Execution of Judgments and
Assembly members during the Assembly’s part-sessions on how best
to improve the implementation of judgments within a given country;
such meetings could take place with a view to a subsequent country
visit involving parliamentarians to improve the national mechanisms
for the implementation of judgments as well as democratic engagement
in supporting such measures;
2.17 continue to take measures aimed at ensuring greater transparency
of the process of supervision of the implementation of the Court’s
judgments and a greater role for the Assembly, the applicants, civil society
and national human rights institutions in this process, including
by improving the accessibility of information on the status of the
implementation of judgments on the HUDOC-EXEC website;
2.18 ensure that all interim and final resolutions contain
clear, specific reasoning to justify closing the supervision of
a case (or elements of a case), in accordance with transparent criteria,
in order to improve the transparency and accountability of decision
making, so that European citizens can understand and have confidence
in this core part of the European system of protecting human rights,
democracy and the rule of law;
2.19 develop a process for the supervision of the respect of
interim measures indicated by the Court.
