Search
document

Document text Analytics

MATHES v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 12973/87 • ECHR ID: 001-45504

Document date: January 13, 1992

Inbound citations: 1
•
Cited paragraphs: 2
•
Outbound citations: 0

MATHES v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 12973/87 • ECHR ID: 001-45504

Document date: January 13, 1992

Cited paragraphs only

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

SECOND CHAMBER

APPLICATION No. 12973/87

Franz MATHES

against

AUSTRIA

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

(adopted on 13 January 1992)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I THE PARTIES

(paras. 1 - 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

II. SUMMARY OF THE FACTS

(paras. 3 - 6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

III. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

(paras. 7 - 16) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

IV. THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION

(paras. 17 - 20) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

APPENDIX : Decision on the admissibility of the application 6

I. THE PARTIES

1. The present Report which was drawn up by the European

Commission of Human Rights (Second Chamber) in accordance with

Article 30 para. (1) (c) of the Convention, concerns the application

brought by Franz Mathes against Austria.

2. The applicant was represented before the Commission by Mr. C.

Prem, lawyer, Vienna.

The Austrian Government were represented before the Commission

by their Agent, Ambassador Helmut Türk, Head of the International

Law Department at the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

II. SUMMARY OF THE FACTS

3. The facts of the case are set out in the Commission's Decision

as to the admissibility of the application of 5 December 1990,

attached hereto as an Appendix (pp. 6 - 9).

4. The pertinent facts and complaints may be summarised as

follows:

5. Preliminary investigations were instituted against the

applicant in respect of knowing of improper transactions and aiding

and abetting fraud. On 16 June 1989 the prosecution requested that

the proceedings be suspended and a decision to this end was taken

pursuant to Article 412 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

(Strafprozeßordnung) on 29 June 1989. Proceedings under Article 412

of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be re-opened at any time.

6. Before the Commission the applicant complained under Article 6

para. 1 of the Convention of the length of the criminal proceedings

against him and that an unreasonable criminal charge had been raised

against him.

III. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

7. The application was introduced on 6 April 1987 and registered

on 6 June 1987.

8. On 6 July 1989 the Commission decided to communicate the

complaint concerning the length of the proceedings to the respondent

Government, pursuant to Rule 42 para. 2 (b) (former version) of its

Rules of Procedure, and to invite them to submit written

observations on the admissibility and merits of the application.

9. The observations of the Government were submitted on 16

November 1989 and the applicant's reply on 27 April 1990.

10. On 7 November 1990 the Commission decided that the case should

be referred to the Second Chamber.

11. On 5 December 1990 the Commission (Second Chamber) declared

the application partly inadmissible and admissible as to the

complaint concerning the length of the proceedings.

12. The text of the Commission's decision on admissibility was

communicated on 16 January 1991 to the parties who were invited to

submit any additional observations or further evidence which they

wished to put before the Commission. No such observations were

received.

13. The Commission considered the state of the proceedings in the

case on 5 March 1991 and on 8 July 1991.

14. By letter of 2 October 1991 the Government informed the

Commission that the applicant had died in September 1991 and that,

consequently, the proceedings against the applicant had been

stopped. The applicant's representative was informed of the

Government's letter on 4 December 1991.

15. On 13 January 1992 the Commission (Second Chamber) decided to

strike the present application off its list, in accordance with

Article 30 para. 1 (c) of the Convention. It adopted the present

Report and decided to transmit it to the Committee of Ministers and

the Parties for information and to publish it.

16. The following members were present:

MM. S. TRECHSEL, President of the Second Chamber

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A. WEITZEL

J. C. SOYER

H. G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G. H. THUNE

MM. F. MARTINEZ

L. LOUCAIDES

IV. THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION

17. The Commission notes that the applicant has died.

18. The Commission recalls that successors of a deceased applicant

cannot claim a general right that the examination of an application

should be continued by the Commission (cf. No. 8261/77, Kofler v.

Italy, Comm. Report 9.10.82, D.R. 30 p. 5). The essential point is

whether, bearing in mind the nature of the particular application,

the successor can be considered to have sufficient interest to

justify the further examination of the application on his or her

behalf.

19. In the present case, the complaint related to the length of

the criminal proceedings against the applicant. Such an application

is closely linked to the person of the deceased applicant.

20. The Commission concludes, therefore, that it is no longer

justified to continue the examination of this application, within

the meaning of Article 30 para. 1 (c) of the Convention. It further

considers that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention

does not require the continuation of the examination.

For these reasons, the Commission unanimously

DECIDES TO STRIKE APPLICATION NO. 12973/87 OFF ITS LIST OF

CASES;

ADOPTS THE PRESENT REPORT;

DECIDES TO SEND THE PRESENT REPORT to the Committee of

Ministers for information, to send it also to the parties'

representatives, and to publish it.

Secretary to the President of the

Second Chamber Second Chamber

(K. ROGGE) (S. TRECHSEL)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant