Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),   Having regard to the final judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in this case and to the violation established;   Recalling

to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Clube de Futebol União de Coimbra delivered on 30 July 1998 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling

Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),   Having regard to the final judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in this case and to the violation established;   Recalling

judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Demai against France delivered on 28 October 1994 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;        Recalling

judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Marlhens against France delivered on 24 May 1995 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;        Recalling

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”),   Recalling

no. 28490/95) transmitted on 19 September 2003 to the Committee for supervision of execution in accordance with Article 46 § 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”);   Recalling

xa0; Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Woukam Moudefo case, delivered on 11 October 1988 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling

violations of the Convention relating to a number of issues regarding the situation in the northern part of Cyprus since the military intervention by Turkey in July and August   1974;   Recalling

their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and -           of general measures preventing similar violations;   Recalling

measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgment including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2016)10 );   Recalling

of the European Court of Human Rights in the Roselli Italo IV case delivered on 15 February 2000 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers on the same date under Article 46 of the Convention; Recalling

and others) transmitted the same date to the Committee for supervision of execution in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2, of the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”);   Recalling

Stressing that more than three hundred judgments delivered within this period highlights the existence of complex structural problems at domestic level affecting large categories of persons;   Recalling

  2 against the Russian Federation transmitted to the Committee for supervision of its execution under Article 46 of the Convention;   Recalling that in this judgment the Court unanimously &#

Human Rights on 20   November   1987, under Article   25 of the Convention, by a Greek limited company, Stran Greek Refineries, and its sole shareholder, Mr Stratis Andreadis;   Recalling

applicants’ release, while expressing its profound regret that, the authorities of the Russian Federation had not actively pursued all effective avenues to comply with the Court’s judgment;   Recalling

decisions of the Committee of Ministers since the early 1980s finding violations by Italy of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention, due to the excessive length of judicial proceedings;   Recalling

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”);   Recalling