Search
document

Document text Analytics

BUZUNIS v. GREECE

Doc ref: 22997/93 • ECHR ID: 001-2211

Document date: July 4, 1995

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

BUZUNIS v. GREECE

Doc ref: 22997/93 • ECHR ID: 001-2211

Document date: July 4, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 22997/93

by Dimitrios BUZUNIS

against Greece

The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting

in private on 4 July 1995, the following members being present:

Mrs. J. LIDDY, Acting President

MM. C.L. ROZAKIS

E. BUSUTTIL

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. MARXER

G.B. REFFI

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

E. KONSTANTINOV

G. RESS

A. PERENIC

C. BÎRSAN

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 4 August 1993 by

Dimitrios BUZUNIS against Greece and registered on 23 November 1993

under file No. 22997/93;

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

of Procedure of the Commission;

Having regard to :

- the Commission's decision of 2 December 1994 to declare

inadmissible part of the application and communicate the

remainder;

- the observations submitted by the respondent Government on

9 February 1995;

- the applicant's letter received on 27 March 1995 and his letter

dated 19 April 1995.

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is a Greek citizen, born in 1938 in Argolida.

The facts of the case, as they have been submitted by the

parties, may be summarised as follows:

On 16 July 1986 the applicant was arrested by the Italian police

in international waters for drug trafficking. He was placed in

detention on remand. On 4 December 1987 he was found guilty by the

First Instance Criminal Court of Bari and sentenced to 5 years'

imprisonment and a fine of 5,000,000 lire. The court further ordered

the suspension of the execution of the sentence and the applicant's

immediate expulsion from Italy. The applicant was duly expelled from

the country. He lodged, however, an appeal which was heard on

30 November 1990. The court of appeal reduced his sentence to

three years and four months.

On 31 December 1991 the Greek authorities ordered the applicant's

arrest for drug-trafficking in connection with the same set of facts.

On 12 February 1992 the Public Prosecutor of the Court of Appeal of

Piraeus summoned the applicant as well as ten other persons to appear

before the three-member Court of Appeal (trimeles efetio) of Piraeus,

which was competent to hear the case at first instance due to the

nature of the offences, on 18 December 1992.

The applicant was arrested on 1 September 1992. On

18 December 1992 he appeared before the Court of Appeal and requested

an adjournment on the ground that his lawyer was participating in a

strike organised by the Athens Bar. The court granted the applicant's

request and adjourned until 3 March 1993.

On 3 March 1993 the applicant asked for another adjournment on

the ground that his lawyer continued to be on strike. His request was

satisfied and the hearing was adjourned until 2 June 1993.

On 2 June 1993 the case was heard. On 3 June 1993 the applicant

was sentenced to 17 years' imprisonment. The court decided to deduct

from the applicant's sentence the period he had spent in detention on

remand in Italy and Greece. The applicant lodged an appeal.

On 3 June 1994 the five-member court of appeal (pentameles

efetio) of Piraeus adjourned the hearing at the applicant's request

until

25 January 1995 due to the lawyers' strike.

On 25 January 1995 the court decided to adjourn the examination

of the appeal once again at the request of one of the applicant's co-

accused whose lawyer was ill. The applicant's lawyer did not oppose the

request. A new hearing was fixed for 2 June 1995.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains about the length of the criminal

proceedings instituted against him in Greece. He does not invoke any

specific provision of the Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 4 August 1993 and registered

on 23 November 1993.

On 2 December 1994 the Commission declared inadmissible the

application insofar as it concerned the applicant's complaint that the

proceedings against him in Greece were in breach of the ne bis in idem

principle. It also invited the Government to submit written

observations on the admissibility and merits of the applicant's

complaint raised in a letter addressed to the Commission on

24 June 1994 regarding the length of the criminal proceedings

instituted against him in Greece, pursuant to Rule 48 para. 2 (b) of

the Rules of Procedure.

The Government's written observations were submitted on

9 February 1995. The applicant was invited to submit observations in

reply before 10 April 1995.

On 27 March 1995 the Commission received a letter from the

applicant in which he only elaborated on the complaint which had been

declared inadmissible and claimed that he never wished to complain

about the length of the proceedings. On 6 April 1995 he was invited to

clarify whether he wished to maintain his complaint concerning the

length of the criminal proceedings instituted against him in Greece.

On 19 April 1995 the applicant informed the Commission that he

wished to "maintain" the complaint which had been declared

inadmissible. On 19 May 1995 the applicant was reminded that the time-

limit for the submissions of his observations in reply concerning his

complaint concerning the length of the proceedings had expired and that

no extension request had been received. The applicant's attention was

drawn to the provisions of Article 30 of the Convention. No reply has

been received.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the applicant has not submitted

observations in reply within the time-limit set by the Commission

concerning the complaint about the length of the criminal proceedings

instituted against him in Greece. Moreover, in a letter received by the

Commission on 27 March 1995 the applicant claimed that he never wished

to complain about the length of the proceedings.

The Commission concludes under Article 30 para. 1 (a) of the

Convention that the applicant no longer intends to pursue his petition.

It further considers that respect for Human Rights as defined in the

Convention does not require it to continue the examination of the

application.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE REMAINDER OF THE APPLICATION OUT OF THE

LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to Acting President of

the First Chamber the First Chamber

(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (J. LIDDY)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant