European Court of Human Rights

Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)84¹

Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

NA. against the United Kingdom

(Application No. 25904/07, judgment of 17 July 2008, final on 06 August 2008)

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”);

Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;

Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the risk that the applicant might be subjected to torture or degrading or inhuman treatment in his country of origin, Sri Lanka, if the removal directions against him were to be enforced (violation of Article 3) (see details in Appendix);

Having invited the government of the United Kingdom to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;

Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),

Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate:

- of individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and

- of general measures, preventing similar violations;

DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and

DECIDES to close the examination of this case.

Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)84

Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of

NA. against the United Kingdom

Introductory case summary

This case concerns the risk that the applicant might be subjected to torture or degrading or inhuman treatment in his country of origin, Sri Lanka, if the removal directions against him were to be enforced (violation of Article 3).

The applicant, an ethnic Tamil, entered the United Kingdom clandestinely on 17 August 1999 and claimed asylum the next day. The United Kingdom refused his application for asylum and issued removal directions against the applicant for 25 June 2007. However, these directions were not enforced because, on that date, the European Court applied Rule 39 of the Rules of the Court indicating that the applicant should not be removed until further notice.

In its judgment, the Court concluded that there was no general risk to Tamils returning to Sri Lanka but considered that an assessment of whether there was a risk had to be made on an individual basis. In the case of the applicant, the individual risk factors when considered cumulatively against the background of the deteriorating security situation meant there would be a violation of Article 3 if he were returned.

I. Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures

a) Details of just satisfaction

b) Individual measures

The United Kingdom authorities provided information on 14 October 2008, confirming that the removal directions would not be applied to the applicant. The applicant was granted six months leave to remain on a discretionary basis.

II. General measures

The United Kingdom Border Agency has updated its Operational Guidance Note on Sri Lanka (OGN v7.0) of August 2008 to refer to the European Court’s judgment, highlighting the key points (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/countryspecificasylumpolicyogns/).

The United Kingdom authorities confirmed that internal guidance was provided to caseworkers within the UK Border Agency who are responsible for considering applications on humanitarian grounds by Sri Lankan Tamils, including those applicants with previous Rule 39 measures, to do so in accordance with the Court’s judgment. The domestic courts in the United Kingdom, acting in accordance with the Human Rights Act 1998, are bound to take into account the European Court’s judgment when determining similar cases in the future.

The judgment of the European Court has been widely reported including publication in the New Law Journal (N.L.J. 2008, 158(7338), 1322-1323); and The Times, 28/07/2008.

III. Conclusions of the respondent state

The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that these measures will prevent new similar violations and that the United Kingdom has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.