GIOVANNI VENTURA AGAINST ITALY

Doc ref: 7438/76 • ECHR ID: 001-49241

Document date: September 25, 1981

Doc ref: 7438/76 • ECHR ID: 001-49241

Document date: September 25, 1981

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 by Mr Giovanni Ventura against

Italy (No. 7438/76);

Whereas on 26 March 1981 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 introduced on 20 March 1976 the applicant

complained that the length of his detention on remand as well as the

length of the criminal proceedings instituted against him inter alia

for certain criminal attempts having occasioned death which took place

in Milan in December 1969 constituted respectively violations of

Article 5, paragraph 3 (art. 5-3), and Article 6, paragraph 1

(art. 6-1), of the convention;

Whereas the Commission, after having declared the application

admissible on 9 March 1978, has expressed in its report the opinion,

by ten votes against four with one abstention, that there was no

breach of Article 5, paragraph 3 (art. 5-3), of the convention and by

eleven votes against four that there was equally no breach of

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

Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance

with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the convention;

Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1

(art. 32-1), of the convention,

Decides that in this case there was no violation of the Convention for

the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant