Source: http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/echrpresidentonturkeyandcyprus.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 07:52:12+00:00

Document:
*Strasbourg/ECHR/Angelo Marcopolo/- Among various possible Measures, CoE's Committee of Ministers should launch an Infringement Proceeding against Turkey for blatantly and repeatedly Refusing to Cooperate in ECHR Judgements' Execution at several Cases concerning Cyprus' Refugees/IDPs and even "Missing" People, (See, f.ex.: http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/turkeuyrefusescooperationwithcoe.html + http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/turkeypersiststodisrespectechrjudgementsoncyprus.html , etc), Replied Today in Substance, indirectly but clearly, ECHR's President, Guido Raimondi, to a relevant Question raised by "Eurofora", during his Annual Press Conference for 2019, where he found Ankara's stance "very Regrettable".
Such Infringement Proceeding, as that suggested now by Pesident Raimondi, against a CoE's Member State which Fails to fullfil its Obligation to Abide by any ECHR Judgement to which it is Party, has Entered into Force already Since 2010, but its First ever Use Started just from December 2017, in a case concerning Afghanistan. There Baku's Government had reportedly delayed about 3 Years (2014 - 2017) to apply ECHR's ruling on a jailed dissident, while Turkish Authorities notoriously delayed around a Decade, or even More, since relevant Judgements on Greek-Cypriots Refugees/"Missing" Persons' cases, where Applications may have been lodged to ECHR as Early as, already since the 1990ies, with result for several Victims to have, Meanwhile, ...Died, vainly Waiting for an elementary justice too long, (See, f.ex.: http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/turkeyblocksechrjudgementswhilevictimsdie.html , etc), until Turkey even Started, recently, top Repeatedly Boast that it Openly Refuses to Cooperate with the CoE on many such ECHR Judgements' Execution, unless it bowed to Ankara's Blackmail pushing to Definitively Drop certain cases... (See, f.ex. Supra + Infra).
- It concerns Cyprus' Refugees/IDPs, (and "Missing" People, at least in a key case), on whom ECHR has already published several Well Known Judgements, with Crystal-Clear Condemnations (of Turkey), since a long Time ago, which are still Pending" for execution.
>>> "The New Problem is that, for the 1st Time, appeared a "Special" Attitude from Turkey inside the (CoE's) Committee of Ministers, Recently Repeated at least Twice (on September + December 2018 : See ... + ..., etc) : Ankara's representatives Do Not Reply to any Questions, Refuse even to Speak, do Not Participate in the Debates, they have even very Clearly said that they Refuse to intervene on the Execution of several ECHR's Judgements, that you have issued since a long Time ago, on a Series of Cases on Cyprus' Refugees/IDPs, where ECHR has pronounced itself with some Well Known Decisions, including, f.ex., on Loizidou (the remainder), Xenides-Arestis, etc, so that the Situation looks quite Blocked" (Stuck), we Denounced.
- "CoE's Committee of Ministers has naturaly taken at least 2 Decisions Reminding that every CoE's Member State is Obliged at least to try to Implement ECHR's Judgements, to Participate in efforts to do so, and to Cooperate with the CoE in that aim. But, here we have a net Refusal to Cooperate, since Turkey asks to Stop and "Close" certain Cases, and Never Deal with them, No More, so that there is an Obstruction, there", (and even an obvious Blackmail).
+ "This raises also a matter of General Principle, because Other Countries might, eventually, be "Inspired" by such an UnPunished Negative Behavior, in order to Do Alike, in the Future", we Warned.
=> "What do you think that Should be done about this ? The Question mainly concerns CoE's Committee of Ministers, But there are, probably, also certain things possible from ECHR's side, its Case-Law, and/or by using adequately some Articles of the Convention itself, etc., "Eurofora" suggested, (pointing, inter alia, also to a relevant ECHR Great Chamber's Judgement of May 2014, which had given some very Interesting Insights on various Other Cases of Cyprus' Refugees/IDPs Human Rights : See .... +..., and Infra, etc).
- "it's, Obviously, very Regrettable", "if there is a Non-Cooperative stance by one Member State inside CoE's Committee of Ministers, during its Supervision of ECHR Judgements' Execution", Replied from the outset to the above-mentioned "Eurofora"s Question on Turkey and Cyprus, ECHR's President.
- In fact, "there are §3 and §4, of Article 46, which have, Now, entrusted the ECHR with a Legal Competence in this area :", Raimondi observed positively.
=> "The Activation (triggering) of this competence has been attributed to the (CoE's)Committee of Ministers, with a Qualified Majority", (i.e. Not Unanimity), he noted.
- But "it has already Started to be used Recently, f.ex. in tha case of "Mammadov v. Azerbaijan", (from December 2017, concerning the imprisonment of a political dissident), found ECHR's Chief.
>>> So that, "in Extreme Cases, if there is a Lack of Cooperation from a Member State, on ECHR Judgements' Execution, the Committee of Ministers has always the possiblity to use that Mechanism", stressed President Raimondi.
Turkey, followed then by Poland, were the Last to Ratify that Protocol 14, which Entered into Force after 2010, (but is Applicable, in principle, to all Pending Cases).
Under the Heading: "Binding Force and Execution of Judgements", the above-mentioned Article 46 of the Revised EConvHR, clearly Stresses from the outset (§ 1) that all CoE's Member States "Undertake to Abide by the Final Judgements of the (PanEuropean) Court (of Human Rights), in Any Case to which they are Parties".
>>> And its § 4 gives to CoE's Committee of Ministers the possibility to "Refer" to the ECHR the case of any Member State which "Refuses to Abide by a Final Judgement", according to a Decision taken by a 2/3 Majority, in order to attest whether that State has, indeed, "Failed to fullfil its (above-mentioned) Obllgation".
- "If the ECHR Finds (such) a Violation", then, "it shall refer the case" back "for consideration of the Measures to be taken" by the Committee of Ministers (for Sanctions), § 5 concludes.
It's Also by Referring to that Same "Article 46", that ECHR's Great Chamber, in a Landmark Judgement of May 2014, concerning the Inter-State Case of "Cyprus v. Turkey", has already made it clear that, as a matter of General Principle, "Under Article 46, the State Party is under an Obligation Not Just to Pay those concerned the sums awarded by the Court by way of just satisfaction, But Also to take Individual and/or, if appropriate, General Measures in its domestic legal order, to put an End to the Violation found by the Court and to Redress the Effects, the Aim being to put the Applicant, as far as possible, in the Position he Would have been in had the requirements of the Convention Not been Disregarded... Albeit connected with each other, the Obligation to take individual and/or general Measures, and the Payment of just satisfaction are 2 Distinct forms of Redress, and the former in no way precludes the latter".
(NDLR : Fast Translation from the Original, mostly in French.
"DraftNews", as already send, Earlier, to "Eurofora" Subscribers/Donors. A more accurate, full Final Version, may be Published asap).

References: §3
 §4
 v. 
 § 4
 § 5
 v.