The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 (art. 54)

of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

(hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),

Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Weber

case delivered on 22 May 1990 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of

Ministers;

Recalling that the case originated in an application against Switzerland lodged

with the European Commission of Human Rights on 15 May 1984 under Article 25

(art. 25) of the Convention by Mr Franz Weber, a Swiss national, who complained

of judicial proceedings conducted without a hearing and resulting in his

conviction for having breached, at a press conference, the confidentiality of an

investigation;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission

on 12 April 1989 and by the Government of Switzerland on 3 July 1989;

Whereas in its judgment of 22 May 1989 the Court:

- held by six votes to one that Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the

  Convention applied in the instant case and that there had been

  a breach of it;

- held unanimously that there had been a breach of Article 10 (art. 10);

- held unanimously that the respondent state was to pay the

  applicant for costs and expenses, the sum of 8 482,50 Swiss

  francs;

- dismissed unanimously the remainder of the claim for just

  satisfaction;

Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the

application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention;

Having invited the Government of Switzerland to inform it of the measures which

had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 22 May 1990, having regard to

its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;

Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the

Government of Switzerland gave the Committee information about the measures

taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix

to this resolution;

Having satisfied itself that the Government of Switzerland has paid the

applicant the sum provided for in the judgment,

Declares, having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of

Switzerland, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54)

of the Convention in this case.

Appendix to Resolution DH (90) 39

Information provided by the Government of Switzerland

during the examination of the Weber case

by the Committee of Ministers

The Canton of Vaud Code of Criminal Procedure of 12 September 1967 has been

amended by an Act of 12 December 1989, which came into force on 1 July 1990.

Under Sections 184, 185 and 186 of the Act, the parties, their relatives and

acquaintances, their counsel and assistants, their consultants and the latter's

employees, as well as experts and witnesses are bound to maintain the

confidentiality of an investigation, including matters revealed by the

investigation itself and unpublished investigation decisions and measures, on

pain of a fine of a maximum of 5 000 Swiss francs.

According to Section 186, paragraph 3, the punishment provided for shall

henceforth be ordered after a summary investigation by the investigating judge

and not by the President of the Court of Cassation acting of his own motion or

on an information.

The summary investigation by the investigating judge is conducted in accordance

with Sections 254 et seq. of the Code of Criminal Procedure of

12 September 1967. Under Section 264, if the judge considers that he has

sufficient information and that the case comes within his jurisdiction,

he shall give a decision regarding the sentence.

Under Section 265, as amended by the Act of 12 December 1989, if the person

charged states, within the time-limit provided for in Section 188, that he

refuses to accept to be sentenced, the judge must refer the case to the police

court.

In that event, the provisions of the first chapter of Title III of the Code of

Criminal Procedure concerning the hearing and the judgment will apply and the

accused, whose case has thus been referred to the police court, will have the

benefit of adversarial proceedings at a public hearing.

The sum awarded by the Court was paid on 25 June 1990.