CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 30 avril 2002

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s776E10E7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sFE832CA2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Resolution ResDH(2002)40 concerning the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights of 10 April 2001 (final on 10 July 2001) in 22 cases against Turkey (see Appendix) relating to the administration’s delay in payment of compensation for expropriation and the applicable rate of default interest   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 30 April 2002 at the 792nd 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, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”), Having regard to the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the 22 cases listed in the Appendix to this Resolutions, which were delivered on 10 April 2001 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once they had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention; Recalling that these cases originated in applications (see Appendix) against Turkey, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 26 August 1991 under former Article 25 of the Convention by 39 Turkish nationals, and that the Court, seized of the cases under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaints that there had been a breach of the applicants’ right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions due to the administration’s delay in paying additional compensation awarded by domestic courts for expropriation of the applicants’ property and to the substantial difference between the default interest rate applicable at the time and the average rate of inflation in Turkey; Whereas in its judgments of 10 April 2001 concerning these cases the Court, unanimously: - held that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the Convention; - held that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicants, within three months from the date at which the judgment became final, the amounts of just satisfaction indicated in the appendix, and that simple interest at an annual rate of 6% would be payable on these sums from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement; Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention; Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgments of 10 April 2001, having regard to Turkey’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by them; Whereas during the examination of the cases by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new, similar violations (see Resolutions ResDH(2001)70 and ResDH(2001)71 in the Aka and Akkuş against Turkey cases respectively), notably through the entry into force on 1 January 2000 of Law No. 4489, which brought the statutory rate of default interest into line with the annual rediscount rate applied by the Turkish Central Bank to short-term debts (the latter rate is fixed and permanently reviewed, in relation particularly to the country’s inflation rate), and indicated that the Court’s judgments had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned; Having satisfied itself that on 10 July 2001, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgments of 10 April 2001, Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Turkey, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases.   Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2002)40 Details of just satisfaction awarded to the applicants Case Application No. Pecuniary Non-pecuniary Costs and damage damage expenses Günal 19282/92 USD 4,521 USD 1,000 USD 300 Ali Öztürk 19289/92 USD 923 USD 1,000 USD 300 Hasan Öztürk 19290/92 USD 2,677 USD 1,000 USD 300 Kamil Öztürk 19291/92 USD 5,069 USD 1,000 USD 300 Mehmet Öztürk 19292/92 USD 4,072 USD 1,000 USD 300 Muhsin Öztürk 19293/92 USD 3,391 USD 1,000 USD 300 Mustafa Öztürk 19294/92 USD 1,329 USD 1,000 USD 300 Sabri Öztürk 19295/92 USD 235 USD 1,000 USD 300 Yunus Öztürk 19296/92 USD 2,851 USD 1,000 USD 300 Sancar 19297/92 USD 3,199 USD 1,000 USD 300 Sarı 19298/92 USD 3,727 USD 1,000 USD 300 Sezer 19299/92 USD 4,188 USD 1,000 USD 300 Sülün 19300/92 USD 5,352 USD 1,000 USD 300 Şahin & others 19301/92 USD 4,247 USD 1,000 USD 300 to each applicant Aziz Şen & others 19302/92 USD 4,799 USD 1,000 USD 300 to each applicant İbrahim Taşdemir 19304/92 USD 2,033 USD 1,000 USD 300 Mahir Taşdemir & others 19305/92 USD 4,799 USD 1,000 USD 300 to each applicant Mehmet Taşdemir 19306/92 USD 1,190 - USD 300 Zekeriya Taşdemir 19307/92 USD 2,780 USD 1,000 USD 300 Zekiye Yılmaz 19309/92 USD 3,422 USD 1,000 USD 300 Yüksel 19311/92 USD 5,257 USD 1,000 USD 300 Zengin & others 19312/92 USD 1,490 USD 1,000 USD 300 to each applicant