Last Updated on April 24, 2019 by LawEuro
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.2146/10
Aleksandre MANUKIAN
against Georgia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 31 January 2019 as a Committee composed of:
Síofra O’Leary, President,
Mārtiņš Mits,
Lado Chanturia, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 September 2009,
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases, and the applicant’s reply to this declaration,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Aleksandre Manukian, is a Georgian national, who was born in in 1965 and lives in Tbilisi. He was represented before the Court by Mr N. Legashvili, a lawyer practising in Tbilisi.
The applicant’s complaints under Article 3, Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d), and Article 13 of the Convention concerning his alleged ill-treatment in prison, the failure to conduct an effective investigation in this respect, and the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings conducted against him, were communicated to the Georgian Government (“the Government”).
The Government submitted a declaration with a view to resolving part of the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the application.
The declaration provided as follows:
“With due regard to Mr Manukian’s claims under the European Convention on Human Rights, the Government acknowledge the violation of Article 3 of the Convention under its procedural limb due to the absence of effective investigation into the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment of 18 January 2008 and violation of Article 13 due to the absence of effective domestic remedy for his complaints under Article 3 of the Convention.
The Government accepts that Mr Manukian was deprived the possibility to question the witnesses before the court determining criminal charges against him. However, bearing in mind that those testimonies of the witnesses would not be of any relevance to the criminal charges against the applicant but could solely refer to his ill-treatment allegations;
Also considering the fact that the relevant domestic law enforcement authorities are best placed, by virtue of effective criminal investigation, to determine the applicant’s complaints under the substantive limb of Article 3 of the Convention with regard to the alleged ill-treatment on 18 January 2008;
The Government, in light of the particular circumstances of the case, undertake:
– to initiate and ensure the effective investigation of the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment on 18 January 2008 and in this course question all the relevant witnesses;
– to pay Mr Manukian 3,500 (three thousand five hundred) Euros to cover any pecuniary or non-pecuniary damages as well as costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.
This sum will be converted into Georgian national currency at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertakes to pay simple interest on it, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points …”
The applicant informed the Court that he agreed to the terms of the declaration. He also stated that he wished to withdraw the remainder of his complaints.
THE LAW
The Court finds that, following the applicant’s express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government, this part of the application should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties.
It therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify the continued examination of this part of the application.
As concerns the remainder of the application, the Court notes that the applicant has expressed his wish to withdraw it.In the light of the foregoing and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention and the Protocols thereto, the Court, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of this part of the application either.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Articles 37 § 1 (a) and 39 of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 21 February 2019.
Liv Tigerstedt Síofra O’Leary
Acting Deputy Registrar President
Leave a Reply