bugarijaomoilinden2013dd1124dh

8/12/2019 BugarijaOMOIlinden2013dd1124DH

1/4

SECRETARIAT GENERAL

SECRETARIAT OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERSSECRETARIAT DU COMITE DES MINISTRES

Contact: Abel CamposTel: 03 88 41 26 48

Date: 18/10/2013

DH-DD(2013)1124

Meeting: 1186 meeting (3-5 December 2013) (DH)

Item reference: Action plan (16/10/2013)

Communication from Bulgaria concerning the case of UMO Ilinden and others against Bulgaria (ApplicationNo. 59491/00).

* * * * * * * * * * *

Runion : 1186 runion (3-5 dcembre 2013) (DH)

Rfrence du point : Plan d'action

Communication de la Bulgarie relative laffaire UMO Ilinden et autres contre Bulgarie (requten 59491/00) (anglais uniq uement)

Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the saidRepresentative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers.

Les documents distribus la demande dun/e Reprsentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilit dudit/de

ladite Reprsentant/e, sans prjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comit des Ministres.


2/4

ACTION PLAN

in the Cases of

UMO ILINDEN AND OTHERS

Application 59491/00

Judgment of 19/01/2006

Final on 19/04/2006

UMO ILINDEN AND OTHERS V. BULGARIA (No.2)

Application No 34960/04

Judgment of 18/10/2011

Final on 18/03/2012

1. Convention violation foundInfringement of the freedom of association of an organization which aims to achieve "the

recognition of the Macedonian minority in Bulgaria" - refusal to register their association in

1998-99, based on considerations of national security (alleged separatist ideas) when theapplicants had not manifestedan intention to use violence or other undemocratic means to

achieve their aims (violation of Art. 11).

2. Individual measuresThe compensation awarded in both cases was transferred within a time limit to the applicantsaccount. Awareness-raising measures were adopted in order to ensure that a possible new

request will be examined in compliance with the requirements of the Convention (see generalmeasures).

3. General measuresa) Awareness raising measuresAwareness raising measures have been adopted (training activities, dissemination of the

judgment).

The European Courts judgment was sent to the Sofia City Court and to the SupremeCourt of Cassation with a letter drawing their attention to the countrysobligations under the

Convention. The judgment was sent to the Regional Court of Blagoevgrad and to the SofiaCourt of Appeal (competent for the registration of associations in the region concerned),

together with a letter indicating that this communication is made within the framework of theadoption of the general measures for the execution of the European Courts judgment. In

addition, with a view to raising the awareness of the competent authorities, a CD manual,elaborated by the National Institute of Justice, was sent to 153 courts, the same number of

prosecutors offices and to 29 investigation offices. The manual contains examples of case-

DH-DD(2013)1124 : distributed at the request of Bulgaria/distribu la demande de la Bulgarie.

Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative,

without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribus la demande dun/e

Reprsentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilit dudit/de ladite Reprsentant/e, sans prjuger de la position juridique ou

politique du Comit des Ministres.


3/4

law of the European Court in the field of the freedom of association and freedom of assembly,

as well as articles, studies and other material relating to these areas. It may be downloadedfrom Internet, at hhtp://www.blhr.org/bibl.htm

Furthermore, several training activities have been organized. A seminar for judges andprosecutors on freedom of association and assembly with the participation of the Council of

Europe was organized by the National Institute of Justice in October 2007. Another seminaron this subject, for judges, prosecutors, representatives of the Ombudsmans Office, lawyers

and NGOs was organized in December 2007 by the Ministry of Justice and the Department

for execution of judgments. Yet another training activity for mayors and police chiefs took

place in May 2008. Another seminar for judges and prosecutors was organized by the

National Institute of Justice in June 2008. In October 2008 a group of judges from the

Supreme Court of Cassation, of prosecutors and of representatives of the Government Agents

Office paid a study visit to the Council of Europe during which they participated in a working

seminar.

b) Publication and dissemination of the judgment

The judgment of the European Court was published on the website of the Ministry ofJustice http://www.mjs.bg/47, to draw public attention, as well as that of relevant authorities,

to the requirements of the Convention in this field. The judgment was also published in thenew quarterly journal European Law and Integration, which is published by the Ministry of

Justice in 1000 copies and distributed to magistrates and academics (No 2/2006), togetherwith an article analyzing the European Courts conclusions in these cases, as well as the

Courts case-law in this field.

The judgments in English have been sent to the competent national authorities.

The translation of the judgment in Bulgarian has been sent to the competent nationalauthorities.

c) Recent developments

In proceedings which ended in July 2013, the Bulgarian courts rejected the application

for registration submitted by the members of the Board of UMO "Ilinden" to the Blagoevgrad

Regional Court, Commercial Division, (l case No 85/2010). The development of the

proceedings before the Regional Court of Blagoevgrad, Sofia Court of Appeal and the

Supreme Court of Cassation is as follows:

On 27.10.2010 the Blagoevgrad Regional Court received application for registration of

non-profit organization, submitted by the newly formed association named UMO "Ilinden.The progress of the application proceedings was stayed many times by the court, instructingthe applicants to remove the inconsistencies found. Not all circumstances, subject to

compulsory registration, were filled in the application - the powers of the associationsbodies; the clarification whether the organization will function as an association of public

utility or not - due to the controversy found in the application and in the statute; the

specification and a clear indication of the purpose and activities of the association in regard tothe fact pointed out in the statue, that the association will continue the national struggle for

freedom of the Macedonian nation, it will participate in the elections, it will defend politicalrights, it will protect the Macedonians against the discrimination the policy of the Bulgarian

State, which seeks the direct incitement of the national enmity etc.In a decision of 03.02.2012 the Blagoevgrad Regional Court (decision No 15 in case No

85/2010) refused the registration holding that the applicants have not addressed all the

deficiencies identified by the court (in the application), although they were presented with the







4/4

opportunity to do that. Moreover, in its reasoning the court stated that the associations

objectives were against the security of other citizens of the country and this will lead to the

creation of hostile relations between the "discriminated Macedonians" and the rest of the

Bulgarian citizens, and that that is contrary to the laws of the country.

The Sofia Court of Appeal (SCA) confirmed the findings of the lower court and upheldits decision, finding that the objectives set by the association and the means to achieve them

were in controversy with the law and revealing political character, and that was unacceptable

for the formation of a non-profit organization. The SCA confirmed also that the objectives ofthe association were contrary to the unity of the nation as they openly opposed one part of

Bulgarian citizens to another part by creating national and ethnic hatred, which was in conflictwith the imperative norm of Art. 44, para. 2 of the Constitution.

The applicant appealed the decision of the SCA. By Decision No 133/30.04.2013 (in caseNo 510/2012) the SCC, First division, declared the cassation appeal inadmissible on the

grounds that according to the legislation in force, in cases where a judgment of the appellate

court on a private complaint against the refusal of entry in the register of non-profit legal

persons, the refusal of registration does exhaust the procedure of instance control, and thejudgment of the appellate court cannot be appealed to the SCC.

The applicant appealed the decision of the SCC with private appeal to a different section

of the SCC. By decision No 508/15.07.2013 (in private commercial case No 2571/2013) the

SCC, Second Department, upheld the decision of the First Division and, in the absence of a

statutory rule governing the procedures of appeal of the decisions of the appellate court held

on private appeals against a refusal to register an association (Art. 606 CPP), found the appeal

inadmissible.

On 20.12.2008 another transitional refusal for registration of a similar association(commercial case No 96/2008) by the Blagoevgrad Regional Court was not appealed by the

applicants.

In view of the above, the authorities are considering the need for additional generalmeasures to implement the judgments of the ECHR and will provide further information to

the Committee of Ministers in due time.




