The European Court of Human Rights has issued two judgments on Bulgarian cases
OT 14:17:32 11-01-2018
PA1416OT.019
Европейски съд за човешките права - пресцентър
The European Court of Human Rights
has issued two judgments
on Bulgarian cases
Today, the European Court of Human Rights has issued two judgments on Bulgarian cases (see short descriptions and links to full press releases below):
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press?i=003-5968910-7632885
ECHR declares inadmissible case concerning legislation in Bulgaria exposing those affiliated with the communist-era security services
In its decision in the case of Anchev v. Bulgaria (applications nos. 38334/08 and 68242/16) the European Court of Human Rights has unanimously declared the applications inadmissible. The decision is final.
The case concerned a complaint brought by a lawyer having held a number of high-ranking posts in Bulgaria about the decision to expose him in 2008 for affiliation with the former security services during the communist regime in Bulgaria.
First, the Court found that the system chosen in Bulgaria for exposing those found to have been affiliated with the former security services was tightly circumscribed and surrounded by a number of safeguards. It had been chosen after 16 years of debate, passed by the legislature with cross-party support, and upheld by the Constitutional Court.
Moreover, the statutory scheme remained well within the bounds of the substantial room for manoeuvre to be given to ex-communist States in Eastern Europe in choosing how to deal with the legacy of undemocratic regimes. Unlike in other ex-communist States, the decisions to expose those who had been affiliated with the former security services are purely declaratory and do not entail sanctions such as banning people from office or disenfranchisement. Nor did the scheme entail the kind of moral censure to be found under lustration schemes in place in other States. The Court was not certain either that exposure in Bulgaria carried the same kind of universal social stigma as in other States. A number of public figures have been exposed since 2007 without serious social or financial consequences. Indeed, Mr Anchev himself has continued to be involved in business and public life since his exposure.
http://bit.ly/2Frcoms
United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Others v. Bulgaria (no. 3) (no. 29496/16)
Yordan Ivanov and Others v. Bulgaria (no. 70502/13)
Kiril Ivanov v. Bulgaria (no. 17599/07)
The first two cases concerned complaints about the authorities' refusal to allow the registration of an association in Bulgaria, the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden ("Ilinden"), in rulings in 2014-16 and 2012-13 respectively. The third complaint concerned the banning of rallies by peoplewho are linked to that group in September 2006 and September 2007.
Ilinden is based in south-west Bulgaria in an area known as the Pirin region. Its organisers aim to achieve the recognition of a Macedonian minority and organise commemorative events at various sites in the region. Among other things, they allege that there have been massacres of the minority in the past and that rights' problems persist. The European Court has dealt with similar complaints by the group in the past and found violations of Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association) of the European Convention.
In the first of the new applications, the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and two of its members complained about the Bulgarian authorities' refusal to register the group as an association in court rulings delivered in 2014 at first-instance and on appeal in 2015. The Supreme Court of Cassation ruled against the admissibility of a further appeal in 2016. One of the reasons given by the first-instance court was that it found that the stated aims of the association showed that it intended to stir up national and ethnic hatred.
The second complaint was made by nine Bulgarian nationals, of whom the first two are the chairman and deputy chairman of Ilinden, who are also applicants in the first case. They complained about an earlier refusal by the authorities to register their group as an association
in proceedings which ended after the Supreme Court of Cassation refused to admit an appeal on points of law in 2013. As well as finding deficiencies in the registration papers, the courts also raised issues with the stated aims of the organisation. In particular, the first-instance court found that its aims were directed against the security of the rest of the country's citizens and would lead to hostile relations between Macedonians who had allegedly faced discrimination and other Bulgarians.
In the third case, Kiril Kostadinov Ivanov complained about the authorities' refusal to allow two rallies, one in September 2006 by the Macedonian Initiative Committee, and one by Ilinden in September 2007. Mr Ivanov, who is the brother of one the applicants in the first two cases, was
instrumental in organising both events. The authorities' reasons for refusing to allow the first rally included the fact that it would clash with a concert planned for the same day, particularly because Mr Ivanov's event was to be political in nature. The circumstances of the banning of the September 2007 rally were dealt with in the case of United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Ivanov v. Bulgaria (No. 2).
The applicants in all three cases complained in particular under Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association). Mr Kiril Ivanov also complained under Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).
Violation of Article 11 - in the two first cases and, in the case of Kiril Ivanov, in relation only to the rally planned for 30 September 2006
Violation of Article 13 - in the case of Kiril Ivanov, in relation to the rally planned for 30 September 2006
Just satisfaction:
- case of United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Others: EUR 12,000 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 1,220 (costs and expenses) to the applicants jointly;
- case of Yordan Ivanov and Others: EUR 12,000 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 2,000 (costs and expenses) to the applicants jointly;
- case of Kiril Ivanov: EUR 6,000 (non-pecuniary damage).
Best regards,
Tatiana Baeva
Tatiana BAEVA
Media Officer / Spokesperson
Directorate of Communications
Council of Europe
F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex
Tel: +33 3 88 41 21 41
Cell: +33 685 11 64 93
Fax: + 33 3 90 21 49 11
E-mail: Tatiana.BAEVA@coe.int
Website: www.coe.int
Twitter: @CoE, in Russian: @CoE_ru
Subscribe to CoE news!
From: echrpress@echr.coe.int [mailto:echrpress@emailing.coe.int]
Sent: jeudi 11 janvier 2018 10:44
To: TAILLEZ Catherine
Subject: Judgments and decisions of 11 January 2018
T +33(0)390214208 www.echr.coe.int echrpress@echr.coe.int
11.01.2018
Judgments and decisions of 11 January 2018
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 27 judgments and 71 decisions. (link)
Demolition of flats in an Albanian coastal town, in breach of an interim order by national courts, violated the European Convention
Sharxhi and Others v. Albania
ECHR declares inadmissible case concerning legislation in Bulgaria exposing those affiliated with the communist-era security services
Anchev v. Bulgaria
Excessive length of "administrative liquidation" and lack of effective remedy entailed breach of creditor's rights
Cipolletta v. Italy
ECHR rejects complaint against Sweden over prolonged detention pending expulsion after Algerian failed to disclose real nationality
Bencheref v. Sweden
The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights
/ПА/
PA1416OT.019
Европейски съд за човешките права - пресцентър
The European Court of Human Rights
has issued two judgments
on Bulgarian cases
Today, the European Court of Human Rights has issued two judgments on Bulgarian cases (see short descriptions and links to full press releases below):
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press?i=003-5968910-7632885
ECHR declares inadmissible case concerning legislation in Bulgaria exposing those affiliated with the communist-era security services
In its decision in the case of Anchev v. Bulgaria (applications nos. 38334/08 and 68242/16) the European Court of Human Rights has unanimously declared the applications inadmissible. The decision is final.
The case concerned a complaint brought by a lawyer having held a number of high-ranking posts in Bulgaria about the decision to expose him in 2008 for affiliation with the former security services during the communist regime in Bulgaria.
First, the Court found that the system chosen in Bulgaria for exposing those found to have been affiliated with the former security services was tightly circumscribed and surrounded by a number of safeguards. It had been chosen after 16 years of debate, passed by the legislature with cross-party support, and upheld by the Constitutional Court.
Moreover, the statutory scheme remained well within the bounds of the substantial room for manoeuvre to be given to ex-communist States in Eastern Europe in choosing how to deal with the legacy of undemocratic regimes. Unlike in other ex-communist States, the decisions to expose those who had been affiliated with the former security services are purely declaratory and do not entail sanctions such as banning people from office or disenfranchisement. Nor did the scheme entail the kind of moral censure to be found under lustration schemes in place in other States. The Court was not certain either that exposure in Bulgaria carried the same kind of universal social stigma as in other States. A number of public figures have been exposed since 2007 without serious social or financial consequences. Indeed, Mr Anchev himself has continued to be involved in business and public life since his exposure.
http://bit.ly/2Frcoms
United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Others v. Bulgaria (no. 3) (no. 29496/16)
Yordan Ivanov and Others v. Bulgaria (no. 70502/13)
Kiril Ivanov v. Bulgaria (no. 17599/07)
The first two cases concerned complaints about the authorities' refusal to allow the registration of an association in Bulgaria, the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden ("Ilinden"), in rulings in 2014-16 and 2012-13 respectively. The third complaint concerned the banning of rallies by peoplewho are linked to that group in September 2006 and September 2007.
Ilinden is based in south-west Bulgaria in an area known as the Pirin region. Its organisers aim to achieve the recognition of a Macedonian minority and organise commemorative events at various sites in the region. Among other things, they allege that there have been massacres of the minority in the past and that rights' problems persist. The European Court has dealt with similar complaints by the group in the past and found violations of Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association) of the European Convention.
In the first of the new applications, the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and two of its members complained about the Bulgarian authorities' refusal to register the group as an association in court rulings delivered in 2014 at first-instance and on appeal in 2015. The Supreme Court of Cassation ruled against the admissibility of a further appeal in 2016. One of the reasons given by the first-instance court was that it found that the stated aims of the association showed that it intended to stir up national and ethnic hatred.
The second complaint was made by nine Bulgarian nationals, of whom the first two are the chairman and deputy chairman of Ilinden, who are also applicants in the first case. They complained about an earlier refusal by the authorities to register their group as an association
in proceedings which ended after the Supreme Court of Cassation refused to admit an appeal on points of law in 2013. As well as finding deficiencies in the registration papers, the courts also raised issues with the stated aims of the organisation. In particular, the first-instance court found that its aims were directed against the security of the rest of the country's citizens and would lead to hostile relations between Macedonians who had allegedly faced discrimination and other Bulgarians.
In the third case, Kiril Kostadinov Ivanov complained about the authorities' refusal to allow two rallies, one in September 2006 by the Macedonian Initiative Committee, and one by Ilinden in September 2007. Mr Ivanov, who is the brother of one the applicants in the first two cases, was
instrumental in organising both events. The authorities' reasons for refusing to allow the first rally included the fact that it would clash with a concert planned for the same day, particularly because Mr Ivanov's event was to be political in nature. The circumstances of the banning of the September 2007 rally were dealt with in the case of United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Ivanov v. Bulgaria (No. 2).
The applicants in all three cases complained in particular under Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association). Mr Kiril Ivanov also complained under Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).
Violation of Article 11 - in the two first cases and, in the case of Kiril Ivanov, in relation only to the rally planned for 30 September 2006
Violation of Article 13 - in the case of Kiril Ivanov, in relation to the rally planned for 30 September 2006
Just satisfaction:
- case of United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden and Others: EUR 12,000 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 1,220 (costs and expenses) to the applicants jointly;
- case of Yordan Ivanov and Others: EUR 12,000 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 2,000 (costs and expenses) to the applicants jointly;
- case of Kiril Ivanov: EUR 6,000 (non-pecuniary damage).
Best regards,
Tatiana Baeva
Tatiana BAEVA
Media Officer / Spokesperson
Directorate of Communications
Council of Europe
F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex
Tel: +33 3 88 41 21 41
Cell: +33 685 11 64 93
Fax: + 33 3 90 21 49 11
E-mail: Tatiana.BAEVA@coe.int
Website: www.coe.int
Twitter: @CoE, in Russian: @CoE_ru
Subscribe to CoE news!
From: echrpress@echr.coe.int [mailto:echrpress@emailing.coe.int]
Sent: jeudi 11 janvier 2018 10:44
To: TAILLEZ Catherine
Subject: Judgments and decisions of 11 January 2018
T +33(0)390214208 www.echr.coe.int echrpress@echr.coe.int
11.01.2018
Judgments and decisions of 11 January 2018
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 27 judgments and 71 decisions. (link)
Demolition of flats in an Albanian coastal town, in breach of an interim order by national courts, violated the European Convention
Sharxhi and Others v. Albania
ECHR declares inadmissible case concerning legislation in Bulgaria exposing those affiliated with the communist-era security services
Anchev v. Bulgaria
Excessive length of "administrative liquidation" and lack of effective remedy entailed breach of creditor's rights
Cipolletta v. Italy
ECHR rejects complaint against Sweden over prolonged detention pending expulsion after Algerian failed to disclose real nationality
Bencheref v. Sweden
The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights
/ПА/
EUR 1.9558
USD 1.7284
CHF 1.8677