Search
document

Document text Analytics

GROSS v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 13714/88 • ECHR ID: 001-784

Document date: December 7, 1990

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

GROSS v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 13714/88 • ECHR ID: 001-784

Document date: December 7, 1990

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 13714/88

by Matthias GROSS

against Austria

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private

on 7 December 1990, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

J.A. FROWEIN

S. TRECHSEL

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A. WEITZEL

J. C. SOYER

H. G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G. H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ RUIZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 22 October 1987

by Matthias GROSS against Austria and registered on 29 March 1988

under file No. 13714/88;

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, an Austrian citizen born in 1957 who resides in

Linz, complains of disciplinary sanctions imposed on him when he was

serving a two years' sentence in the prison of Garsten.

He had fled from the prison on 27 July 1987 and was

re-arrested on 2 August 1987. By a penal order (Straferkenntnis) of

19 August 1987 the prison governor found him guilty of a disciplinary

offence and ordered his detention in house arrest for 21 days. During

the house arrest the light was switched out at 19.00 hours, the

applicant was not allowed to write to or receive visits from his

family, or to buy tobacco, coffee and tea in the prison shop.

Afterwards he was returned to a more stringent prison regime.

Moreover, the prison governor requested the Regional Court

(Kreisgericht) of Steyr to make an order under Section 115 of the

Criminal Law Enforcement Act (Strafvollzugsgesetz) whereby the period

of house arrest should not be counted as part of the applicant's

sentence. The order was granted on 4 September 1987 and confirmed by

the Linz Court of Appeal (Oberlandesgericht) on 7 October 1987. The

courts noted in particular that by his flight the applicant had

deliberately evaded his duty to work in prison and that his submission

that he had only wanted to visit his seven children had not been

proven.

As a consequence of the above decisions the time which the

applicant spent in prison was prolonged by 21 days.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains that his additional detention was not

justified under Article 5 para. 1 (a) of the Convention. He further

alleges that Article 8 of the Convention has been violated by the

refusal to allow him to correspond with and receive visits from his

family during his house arrest, which he describes as an inhuman

treatment or punishment.

PROCEEDINGS

The application was introduced on 22 October 1987 and

registered on 29 March 1988.

On 14 December 1989 the Commission decided to give notice of

the application to the respondent Government and invite the

Government, pursuant to Rule 42 para. 2 (b) of the Rules of Procedure

(former version), to submit before 23 March 1990 observations in

writing on the admissibility and merits of the application.

The Government submitted their observations on 23 March 1990.

On 9 April 1990 they were transmitted to the applicant who was invited

to submit observations in reply before 18 May 1990.

The applicant has not replied despite reminders of 4 July 1990

and of 17 October 1990, by a registered letter, in which he was also

informed that the Commission might interpret his silence as an

indication that he had lost interest in pursuing the case.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the applicant has not replied to its

letters of 9 April, 4 July and 17 October 1990. It concludes from the

applicant's silence that he has lost interest in pursuing the

application. The conditions of Article 30 para. 1 (c) of the

Convention are therefore met as there are no reasons of a general

character affecting the respect for human rights as defined in the

Convention which would require a further examination of the present

application.

For these reasons the Commission, unanimously

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant