Search
document

Document text Analytics

CAMPICELLI AGAINST ITALY

Doc ref: 13929/88 • ECHR ID: 001-49390

Document date: June 9, 1994

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

CAMPICELLI AGAINST ITALY

Doc ref: 13929/88 • ECHR ID: 001-49390

Document date: June 9, 1994

Cited paragraphs only

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32

(art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights

and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the

Convention"),

Having regard to the report drawn up by the European

Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31

(art. 31) of the Convention relating to the application lodged

on 24 May 1988 by Mr Antonino Campicelli against Italy

(Application No. 13929/88);

Whereas on 1 September 1992 the Commission transmitted the

said report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period

of three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1

(art. 32-1), of the Convention has elapsed without the case

having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in

pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention;

Whereas in his application the applicant complained in

particular of the length of certain criminal proceedings

instituted against him;

Whereas the Commission declared the application in part

admissible on 1 April 1992 (final decision on admissibility) and

in its report adopted on 1 July 1992 expressed unanimously the

opinion that there had been a violation of Article 6,

paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention;

Whereas, at the 485th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies

held on 15 December 1992, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing

with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, having voted

in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1

(art. 32-1), of the Convention, that there had been a violation

of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention;

Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals

made by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards

just satisfaction to be awarded to the applicant, proposals

supplemented by a letter of the President of the Commission dated

10 September 1993;

Whereas at the 499th meeting of the Deputies held

on 15 October 1993 the Committee of Ministers decided, in

accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2 (art. 32-2), of the

Convention, that the Government of Italy was to pay the applicant

as just satisfaction, within three months, the sum of

8 000 000 Italian lire in respect of non-pecuniary damage and the

sum of 5 000 000 Italian lire in respect of costs and expenses;

Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government

of Italy to inform it of the measures taken following its

decisions of 15 December 1992 and 15 October 1993, having regard

to Italy's obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4),

of the Convention to abide by them;

Whereas the Government of Italy reiterated before the

Committee of Ministers that the reforms already adopted - the

entry into force on 24 October 1989 of the new Code of Criminal

Procedure, the internal reforms carried out by the Court of

Cassation and the increase of the budgetary appropriations in

order to finance urgent measures in support of information

systems and the structures, means and services of the

administration of justice - should ensure that in the future

criminal proceedings will lead to judgments delivered within a

reasonable time within the meaning of Article 6 (art. 6) of the

Convention (see, inter alia, Resolution DH (92) 54 concerning the

judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of

Frau against Italy);

Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that on

6 May 1994 the Government of Italy paid the applicant the sum of

13 000 000 Italian lire as just satisfaction,

Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the

Government of Italy, that it has exercised its functions under

Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention in this case;

Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the

Commission in this case.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant