CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 9 décembre 2015

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s40B7A780 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s3985515B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2015)251 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Hirst and three other cases against the United Kingdom   Application Case Judgment of Final on 74025/01 HIRST No. 2 06/10/2005 Grand Chamber 60041/08+ GREENS AND M.T. 23/11/2010 11/04/2011 47784/09+ FIRTH AND OTHERS 12/08/2014 15/12/2014 51987/08+ McHUGH AND OTHERS 10/02/2015 10/02/2015   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 December 2015 at the 1243rd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     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”);   Recalling that, in the present judgments, the Court found that the general, automatic and indiscriminate restriction on the right of convicted prisoners in custody to vote fell outside any acceptable margin of appreciation and was incompatible with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention;   Recalling also that following its initial judgment in Hirst No. 2 (final on 06/10/2005), the European Court adopted the pilot judgment Greens and M.T. (final on 11/04/11), which concluded that the authorities had to introduce legislative proposals to amend the blanket ban on prisoner voting; and on 22 November 2012 the authorities introduced to Parliament legislative proposals setting out three options to amend the voting rights of convicted offenders detained in prison;   Recalling that at its examination of the cases in March 2014, the Committee welcomed the specially appointed Parliamentary Committee’s recommendation that all prisoners serving sentences of 12 months or less should be entitled to vote as a constructive contribution to the legislative process;   Recalling that at its last examination of the cases, in September 2015, the Committee reiterated its serious concern about the ongoing delay in the introduction of a Bill to Parliament and expressed profound regret that, despite its repeated calls, the blanket ban on the right of convicted prisoners in custody to vote remains in place;   EXPRESSED PROFOUND CONCERN that the blanket ban on the right of convicted prisoners in custody to vote remains in place;   REAFFIRMED that, as for all Contracting Parties, the United Kingdom has an obligation under Article 46 of the Convention to abide by judgments of the Court;   INVITED the Secretary General to raise the issue of implementation of these judgments in his contacts with the United Kingdom authorities, calling on them to take the measures necessary to amend the blanket ban on prisoner voting and encouraged the authorities of the member States to do the same;   CALLED UPON the United Kingdom authorities to follow up their commitment to continuing high-level dialogue on this issue leading to the presentation of concrete information on how the United Kingdom intends to abide by the judgment;   NOTED the United Kingdom’s commitment to report regularly on the steps taken and achieved in this respect, and decides to resume consideration of these cases in the light of those reports and in any event at the latest at their 1273rd meeting (December 2016) (DH).