ICCPR Case Digest
View Adopted: 2018.10.25
Kuvvatali Mudorov v. Tajikistan
Tajikistan Unlawfully Seized Property, Provided Unfair Hearing and No Remedy to Victim
- Effective remedy
- Fair hearing
- Article 14.1
- Article 2.3
- Article 26
The author is a Tajikistani national who purchased 90% of the shares of the Republican Rehabilitation Centre at auction. The Tajikistani government decided to nationalize the company and tried to force the author to give it to them, to which he refused. The Supreme Economic Court voided the auction seven years after privatization, even though the lawsuit was time-barred and had to be submitted within three years. The Court decided to award the author the original price he paid for the company, which does not take into account inflation or price increase. All told, the government cheated the author out of 950,000 somoni. All of the author's appeals were denied and his complaints ignored. The author submitted that the government violated his property rights and that not only was the Court's decision not enforced, but he never received any of his promised compensation.
With regard to the alleged violation of article 26 of the Covenant, the Committee considered that the claim according to which the author was denied the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law without any discrimination was insufficiently substantiated for the purposes of admissibility, and was thus inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.
The Committee considered that the author had sufficiently substantiated his claims under article 14, read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3) of the Covenant, for the purposes of admissibility. Accordingly, it declared this part of the communication admissible and proceeded with its consideration of the merits.
The Committee, acting under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, is of the view that the facts before it disclosed a violation of the author’s rights under article 14 (1), read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3) of the Covenant.
In accordance with article 2 (3) (a) of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the author with an effective remedy.
This requires it to make full reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated.
Accordingly, the State party is required, inter alia:
- to fully enforce the court decision of 26 March 2004;
- to take into account all appropriate factors in updating the enforcement on the date of its execution, including the damages suffered by the author as a result of the undue delay in payment of compensation; and
- to take steps to prevent similar violations occurring in the future.
Deadline for Implementation: April 2019