Search
document

Document text Analytics

KREMZOW v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 21025/92 • ECHR ID: 001-2555

Document date: March 2, 1994

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

KREMZOW v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 21025/92 • ECHR ID: 001-2555

Document date: March 2, 1994

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 21025/92

by Friedrich Wilhelm KREMZOW

against Austria

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

2 March 1994, the following members being present:

MM. S. TRECHSEL, President

H. DANELIUS

G. JÖRUNDSSON

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

MM. F. MARTINEZ

L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

M.A. NOWICKI

I. CABRAL BARRETO

J. MUCHA

D. SVÁBY

Mr. K. ROGGE, 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 27 November 1992 by

Friedrich Wilhelm KREMZOW against Austria and registered on

2 December 1992 under file No. 21025/92;

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent

Government on 5 May 1993 and the observations in reply submitted by the

applicant on 5 July 1993; the applicant's further informations of

12 January 1994;

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 at present serving a life sentence. He is

represented by Mr. H. Mühlgassner, a lawyer practising in Vienna.

On 3 September 1992 the Head of the Mittersteig Prison dismissed the

applicant's request that his correspondence with counsel be no longer

subjected to control by the prison authorities. On 20 November 1992 the

Federal Ministry of Justice, referring to S. 90 para. 1, third sentence,

of the Enforcement of Sentences Act (Strafvollzugsgesetz), dismissed the

applicant's appeal.

On 2 December 1993 the Austrian Constitutional Court (Ver-

fassungsgerichtshof), following a complaint lodged by the applicant,

quashed S. 90 para. 1, third and fourth sentence, of the Enforcement of

Sentences Act as being unconstitutional. In its decision, the

Constitutional Court referred in particular to Article 8 of the

Convention, as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights

(Campbell judgment of 25 March 1992, Series A no. 233). Furthermore, the

Constitutional Court quashed the decision of 20 November 1992.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention about the

control of his correspondence with counsel.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 27 November 1992 and registered

on 2 December 1992.

On 8 January 1993 the Commission decided to communicate the

application to the respondent Government for observations on the

admissibility and merits.

On 5 May 1993 the Government submitted their observations. The

observations in reply by the applicant were submitted on 5 July 1993.

In his further submissions of 12 January 1994, the applicant stated that

he did not wish to pursue his application.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the applicant, following successful

proceedings before the Austrian Constitutional Court, does not intend to

pursue his application.

In these circumstances, the Commission finds pursuant to Article 30

para. 1 (a) and (b) of the Convention that it is not justified to

continue the examination of the present application. Moreover, there are

no reasons of a general character affecting respect for Human Rights as

defined in this Convention which require the further examination of this

application.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the Second Chamber President of the Second Chamber

(K. ROGGE) (S. TRECHSEL)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant