Lexploria

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 34572/97

by Silvano VESDANI

against Italy

___________

The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting

in private on 4 March 1998, the following members being present:

MM. M.P. PELLONPÄÄ, President

N. BRATZA

E. BUSUTTIL

A. WEITZEL

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

B. CONFORTI

I. BÉKÉS

G. RESS

A. PERENIC

C. BÎRSAN

K. HERNDL

M. VILA AMIGÓ

Mrs. M. HION

Mr. R. NICOLINI

Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection

of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 9 July 1996 by

Silvano VESDANI against Italy and registered on 22 January 1997 under

file No. 34572/97;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules

of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is an Italian national, born in 1938 and currently

resident in Bournemouth (United Kingdom).

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be

summarised as follows.

The applicant was born on 3 December 1938 in Rome and registered

as the son of a woman who did not wish to reveal her identity. He had

been given the name of Silvano VESDANI.

The applicant, who underwent circumcision in the first few years

of his life, was subsequently placed in an orphanage. During his

childhood, he frequently received visits from a young couple who used

to bring expensive gifts to him. However, he never knew the identity

of these persons.

From 1988 to December 1996, the applicant addressed many letters

and petitions to various Italian authorities - such as the President

of the Republic, the Prime Minister, the Mayor of Rome - seeking the

disclosure of his real parents' identity and of the medical records of

the first years of his life. He also wrote to the clinic A., where he

was presumed to have been born, to the orphanage where he had grown up

and to his secondary school, without obtaining the information he was

looking for.

On 1 December 1992, the applicant requested the Rome Public

Prosecutor's Office to grant him, according to Article 185 of Royal

Decree no. 1238/1939, permission to obtain the original and full copy

of his birth certificate. On 2 December 1992, the Rome Public

Prosecutor granted the requested permission and the applicant was

subsequently given a copy of the certificate in question. It reported

that on 8 December 1938, one Mrs. K. - who was acting in her capacity

as delegate of the director of the above-mentioned clinic A. and was

at that time aged of fifty years old - had declared to the Registrar

of births, deaths and marriages that on 3 December 1938 a baby was born

in Rome to a woman who did not wish to reveal her identity.

The applicant contested the authenticity of this document on many

occasions. On 1 February 1993, the Rome City Council informed him that

the copy reproduced the original certificate kept in its archives and

that the latter could be rectified only by bringing an action before

the Rome District Court according to the procedure prescribed by law

(Articles 167 ff. of Royal Decree no. 1238/1939). On 13 January 1997,

the Rome Public Prosecutor's Office informed the applicant that his

assertion that the certificate was false could not, as such, be taken

into consideration. An investigation could be opened solely on the

basis of a detailed statement of the facts raising doubts as to the

document's authenticity and indicating the names of witnesses who could

confirm them.

The applicant also tried to find Mrs. K., the woman who had made

the declaration of birth. In a letter of 18 December 1994, the

applicant was informed that Mrs. K. had died in Austria, approximately

twenty years earlier.

On 11 November 1996, the administration of the former clinic A.

acquainted the applicant with the fact that his medical records were

no longer in its possession.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains about the impossibility to obtain

information about the names of his real parents. He alleges that by

refusing to co-operate with him, the competent Italian authorities

breached his right to respect to family life, guaranteed by Article 8

of the Convention.

THE LAW

Invoking Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, the applicant

complains about the impossibility to obtain information about the names

of his real parents.

Article 8 (Art. 8) reads as follows:

"1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and

family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority

with the exercise of this right except such as is in

accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic

society in the interests of national security, public

safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the

prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of

health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and

freedoms of others."

The applicant complains about the treatment to which he has been

subjected. He alleges that from his birth until now the competent

Italian authorities failed to co-operate with him and constantly tried

to hide the information he was seeking.

The Commission first observes that the recognition of the right

of individual petition under Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Convention

took effect in respect of Italy on 1 August 1973. It recalls that,

according to the generally recognised principles of international law,

for all Contracting Parties, the Convention governs only facts which

arose after it came into force in respect of the Party concerned.

Consequently, the circumstances relating to the applicant's birth - and

notably the way in which it was registered by the Registrar of births,

deaths and marriages -, which date back to December 1938, will not be

taken into consideration by the Commission as falling outside its

competence ratione temporis.

As to the behaviour of the Italian authorities after 1 August

1973, it is to be noted that the applicant complains about the

impossibility to obtain the information and documents he was seeking,

namely the original and full copy of his birth certificate indicating

the identity of his parents.

The Commission recalls that persons who have been received into

care by Public Institutions, such as orphanages, have a vital interest,

protected by the Convention, in receiving the information necessary to

know and to understand their childhood and early development (see

Eur. Court HR, Gaskin v. the United Kingdom judgment of 7 July 1989,

Series A no. 160, p. 20, para. 49) and that according to its case-law,

the failure to issue a birth certificate may imply an interference with

the right to respect for family life (Nos. 7823/77-7824/77,

Dec. 6.7.77, D.R. 11, pp. 221, 223).

However, it does not appear that in the instant case the

applicant has been denied access to any record concerning his childhood

and the names of his real parents or that the authorities had tried to

hide any information which might be relevant in this respect. The

original and full copy of the birth certificate was in fact delivered

to him, as on 2 December 1992 the Rome Public Prosecutor granted the

permission the applicant had requested. The name of the mother was not

mentioned because she had stated she wished not to disclose her

identity, and nothing suggests that the Italian authorities were or are

aware of it. It is true that the applicant considers that the

certificate is false. However, he has failed to introduce an action to

rectify the birth certificate before the Rome District Court under

Articles 167 ff. of Royal Decree no. 1238/1939, nor has he requested

that criminal proceedings be instituted for forgery. In any case, even

assuming that the applicant has exhausted domestic remedies on this

point, he has not provided the Commission with any factual evidence

supporting his assertion and has therefore not substantiated his

complaint.

It follows that the application is manifestly ill-founded within

the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

M.F. BUQUICCHIO M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

Secretary President

to the First Chamber of the First Chamber

Menu

VESDANI v. ITALY

VESDANI v. ITALY

LEXI