Search
document

Document text Analytics

TEN BERGE v. THE NETHERLANDS

Doc ref: 20929/92 • ECHR ID: 001-45788

Document date: December 5, 1995

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

TEN BERGE v. THE NETHERLANDS

Doc ref: 20929/92 • ECHR ID: 001-45788

Document date: December 5, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

SECOND CHAMBER

Application No. 20929/92

Johannes Alexander Ten Berge

against

the Netherlands

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

(adopted on 5 December 1995)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

PART I : STATEMENT OF THE FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

PART II : SOLUTION REACHED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

INTRODUCTION

1. This Report relates to the application introduced under Article

25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and

Fundamental Freedoms by Johannes Alexander Ten Berge against the

Netherlands on 9 October 1992. It was registered on 12 November 1992

under file No. 20929/92.

The applicant was represented by Mr. G. Spong, a lawyer

practising in The Hague.

The Government of the Netherlands were represented by their

Agent, Mr. K. de Vey Mestdagh, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

2. On 18 May 1995 the Commission (Second Chamber) declared the

application admissible. It then proceeded to carry out its task

under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:

"In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to

it:

a. it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake

together with the representatives of the parties an examination

of the petition and, if need be, an investigation, for the

effective conduct of which the States concerned shall furnish all

necessary facilities, after an exchange of views with the

Commission;

b. it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of

the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly

settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human Rights

as defined in this Convention."

3. The Commission (Second Chamber) found that the parties had

reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 5 December 1995 it

adopted this Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of

the Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of

the solution reached.

The following members were present when the Report was adopted:

Mr. H. DANELIUS, President

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

MM. G. JÖRUNDSSON

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

F. MARTINEZ

J.-C. GEUS

M.A. NOWICKI

I. CABRAL BARRETO

J. MUCHA

D. SVÁBY

P. LORENZEN

PART I

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

4. The applicant is a Dutch citizen, born in 1967 and resident at

The Hague.

5. On 27 December 1988, the applicant was arrested and subsequently

detained on remand on suspicion of having committed several offences.

6. On 11 April 1989, the Regional Court (Arrondissementsrechtbank)

of The Hague convicted the applicant and sentenced him to six years'

imprisonment, less the time spent in detention on remand.

7. On 19 July 1990, the Court of Appeal (Gerechtshof) of The Hague

quashed the Regional Court's judgment, convicted the applicant and

sentenced him to six years' imprisonment, less the time spent in

detention on remand. On 23 July 1990, the applicant filed an appeal

in cassation with the Supreme Court (Hoge Raad).

8. On 7 October 1991, the Court of Appeal's registrar (griffier)

sent the case-file to the Supreme Court, where it was received on

9 October 1991.

9. The Supreme Court started its examination of the case on 24 March

1992 and, on 8 July 1992, rejected the applicant's appeal in cassation.

10. Before the Commission the applicant complained under Article 6

para. 1 of the Convention that the criminal proceedings against him

were not determined within a reasonable time, whereas he remained in

detention throughout the criminal proceedings against him.

PART II

SOLUTION REACHED

11. Following the decision on the admissibility of the application,

the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view

to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with Article 28 para. 1

(b) of the Convention and invited the parties to submit any proposals

they wished to make.

12. In accordance with the usual practice, the Chamber Secretary,

acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to

explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.

13. By letters of 26 June 1995 and 5 July 1995 respectively, the

parties indicated their willingness, in principle, to reach a friendly

settlement.

14. The applicant's representative made proposals on 5 July 1995, to

which the Government reacted on 22 August 1995. The parties further

considered a proposal put forward by the Commission.

15. Finally the applicant's representative notified the Commission,

by letter received on 16 November 1995, that the applicant was prepared

to accept a payment by the respondent Government of an amount of

4.000 Dutch guilders in full and final settlement of the matter. By

letter received on 20 November 1995, the Government informed the

Commission that they accepted to settle the case on this condition.

16. At its session on 5 December 1995, the Commission noted that the

parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.

It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the

Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured

on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.

17. For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.

Secretary to the Second Chamber President of the Second Chamber

(M.-T. SCHOEPFER) (H. DANELIUS)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant