Judgments and decisions of 05.12.2024

2024-12-05T00:00:00
issued by the Registrar of the Court   ECHR 285 (2024)   05.12.2024   Judgments and decisions of 5 December 2024   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing four judgments1 and six   decisions2:   one Chamber judgment is summarised below;   separate press releases have been issued for three Chamber judgments in the cases of El Aroud and   B.S. v. Belgium (applications nos. 25491/18 and 27629/18), Giesbert and Others v. France   (no. 835/20), and Kezerashvili v. Georgia (no. 11027/22);   the six decisions can be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.   The judgment below is available in French only.   M.B. v. France (application no. 31913/21)   The applicant, M.B., is a Tunisian national who was born in 1988 and lives in Montreal (Canada).   The case concerns a preventive measure taken against the applicant on counter-terrorism grounds.   In an order of 19 November 2020 the Minister of the interior placed the applicant under an   individual administrative control and monitoring order (mesure individuelle de contrôle administratif   et de surveillance – “MICAS”), prohibiting him from travelling outside the Paris, Hauts-de-Seine,   Seine-Saint-Denis and Val-de-Marne départements without prior authorisation and requiring him to   report to a police station close to his home once a day, for a period of three months.   Relying on Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement) to the European Convention on   Human Right, the applicant complains, first, of the lack of clarity and foreseeability of the legal basis   for the MICAS imposed on him and, second, of disproportionate interference with his freedom of   movement. Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing), he complains that he was never heard by   the domestic courts in a public hearing and that their reliance on evidence in the form of “notes   blanches” (short, unsigned reports produced by the intelligence services) was unfair.   No violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4   This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,   judgments   and   further   information   about   the   Court   can   be   found   on   https://www.echr.coe.int/home. To receive the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here:   www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on X (Twitter) @ECHR_CEDH.   Press contacts   [email protected]e.int | tel.: +33 3 90 21 42 08   We are happy to receive journalists’ enquiries via either email or telephone.   1 Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a judgment’s   delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five   judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final   judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention,   judgments delivered by a Committee are final.   Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.   Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution.   2 Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.   Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)   Denis Lambert (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)   Inci Ertekin (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 55 30)   Neil Connolly (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 48 05)   Jane Swift (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 29 04)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe member   States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.   2