Shannon v the United Kingdom - 6563/03 [2009] ECHR 2257 (3 December 2009)

BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!

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 as “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 breach of the applicant's right not to incriminate himself, in that he was required to attend an interview with financial investigators and was compelled to answer questions in connection with events in respect of which he had already been charged with offences (Art. 6§1) (see details in Appendix);

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order 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

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

The case concerns the applicant's conviction on 25/02/1999, in Northern Ireland, of the offence of failing without a reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement imposed on him by a financial investigator to attend an interview to answer questions and otherwise furnish information in connection with events in respect of which he had already been charged with offences.

The Court found that this requirement was not compatible with his right not to incriminate himself, even though such evidence was not used in criminal proceedings, or that the underlying criminal proceedings against the applicant were not pursued. Moreover, the special problems in investigating crime in Northern Ireland could not in this case justify the application of the requirement in question to the applicant (violation of article 6§1).

In his claims in respect of pecuniary damage, the applicant included, inter alia, the sum of 200 GBP that he was required to pay as a fine. The Court awarded the applicant a sum in respect of pecuniary and non pecuniary damage.

The Northern Ireland Office has advised that he may apply to the Criminal Cases Review Commission for a review of his conviction, if he wishes. If the CCRC considered it appropriate, it might refer the case to a county court in Northern Ireland under section 12 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995.

The action plan/report presented by the United Kingdom on 26/10/2006 may be summarised as follows:

- The relevant Northern Ireland legislation was amended with effect from 14/04/2000. Paragraph 6(b) of Schedule 2 to the Proceeds of Crime (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 (S.I. 1996/1299, N.I. 9) was amended by section 59 and paragraph 26 of Schedule 3 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to permit use of statements made under paragraph 5 of Schedule 2 to the 1996 Order only if they are adduced, or if they are the subject of questions at trial, by the defence.

- Subsequently, an interdepartmental legislative review was also undertaken. Government departments were asked to consider whether the legislative schemes which they apply would allow the situation that arose in Shannon to recur, and if so, whether any further action was needed to address this. In April 2007 that review concluded that no further action was needed.

-The government is satisfied that no further action is required to implement the judgment.

The government considers that the measures adopted prevent similar violations and that the United Kingdom has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.

1 Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 3 December 2009 at the 1072nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies

Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage	Costs and expenses	Total
1 750 EUR	2 200 EUR	3 950 EUR
Paid within the time-limit

	[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Shannon v the United Kingdom - 6563/03 [2009] ECHR 2257 (3 December 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2009/2257.html Cite as: [2009] ECHR 2257