:(·1 f). AC H P R CHP . rrrrrro . African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Human Rights our Collective Responsibility 2. The Complainant submits that the African Commission and other human rights bodies have established that the non-enforcement of a national court judgment against the State gives rise to a violation of the right to a fair trial. In this regard, it recalls that in the case of Bissongou v . Cong034, where the Republic of Congo had not paid the compensation awarded by its courts to the Complainant, the African Commission concluded that there had been a violation of Article 7 concerning the right to a fair trial "[...} the right to be heard guaranteed by Article 7 of the African Charter includes the right to the execution of a judgment. It would indeed be inconceivable that this Article grants the right to bring before national courts any act violating fundamental rights without guaranteeing the enforcement of judicial decisions. To interpret Article 7 otherwise would lead to situations incompatible with the rule of law. Consequently, the enforcement of a final judgment given by any court or tribunal must be considered as an integral part of the right to be heard protected by Article 7"35 . 3. The Complainant states that this is an international practice, and in the ECtHR jurisprudence the Court has stated that "the right of access to a court guaranteed by Article 6 §1 of the Convention would be illusory if the domestic legal order of a Contracting State allowed afinal and binding judicial decision to remain inoperative to the detriment of a party. The enforcement of a judgment, by 'whatever court, must be considered an integral part of the proceedings within the meaning of Article 636 . She adds that the ECtHR has consistently held that under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the execution of a judicial decision must not be unduly hindered, set aside or delayed. With regard to the period of time within which, according to the ECtHR, national authorities must comply with the decisions of their own courts, the ECtHR has consistently determined that the period of enforcement "should not generally exceed six months from the time when the compensation decision becomes enforceabie'v", 4. The Complainant further indicates that the ECtHR jurisprudence holds that "it is not appropriate to require an indioidual who has obtained a claim against the State as a result ofjudicial proceedings to have to subsequently initiate enforcement proceedings in order to obtain satisfaction 1138; requiring a person to initiate separate 34 African Commission, Bissangou v. Congo, Comm. No. 253/02. 35 Ibid. Para. 75. ECtH:R [GC], Scordino v. Italy (No.1) (1996), Appl, No. 36813/97,29 March 2006, para. 196; see also ECHR, Hornsby v. Greece (1997), Appl, No. 18357/91,19 March 1997, para. 40 ff; ECHR, Metaxas v. Greece (2004), App!. No. 8415/02, 27 May 2004, para. 25; ECtH:R, Musci v. Italy (2006), App!. No. 64699/01, 29 March 2006, para. 88. 37 ECtHR, Cocchiarella v. Italy (2006), Appli. No. 64886/01, 29 March 2006, para. 89; ECtHR, Scordino v. Italy (No.1) (1996), Appli. No. 36813/97, 29 March 2006, para. 198. Human Rights Committee, Sechremelis et al. v. Greece, Comm. No. 1507/2006, CCPR/C/I00/D/1507/2006 (2011), para. 10.4. 38 ECtHR, Puleva and Radeva v. Bulgaria (2012), Appli. No. 36265/05, 14 February 2012, para. 40; E~tC ~afuxa!i':y., Gr,eece (2004), Reg. No. 8415/02, 27 May 2004, para. 19; ECtHR, Burdov v. Russia (No.2) (2009), Appli. N . ~9<tU4;''¥M~1(6009, •" '? ;.:, para. 68. '.-" <~ -_ ..._----_-_. -_------_. . 36 An Oroan or Ihe . ~...'.'... ~... ' ') Af"ncan? Union \_,: ., '" The African .. . Commission on Human andf,eopl s' R,~·9htS.~\' 31 Bijilo Annex Layout, l<olJ11JoNo th ri~:(!1 West Coast~eQ!o Gam fa; Phone: (220) 230 4361 41 O!P-(T4\.)A or au-banjul@afri~a.-u~ htlps:lac . x_.o<t> .al(iJ1~~p.\l'I -: ItO ~11\1E ET O£.S ~ ~ ~ t- ~ Fa.;~:12:WJ Email: \ll <iJ'I ~.,,§.'V '?" Page 17 on 32