SCHERTENLEIB AGAINST SWITZERLAND

Doc ref: 8339/78 • ECHR ID: 001-49240

Document date: July 1, 1981

Doc ref: 8339/78 • ECHR ID: 001-49240

Document date: July 1, 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 Francis Schertenleib against

Switzerland (No. 8339/78);

Whereas on 10 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 22 August 1978, the

applicant complained about the length of his detention on remand and

of the criminal proceedings instituted against him, claiming that the

judicial authorities' refusal to release him on bail was unjustified,

that the judicial authorities had not conducted his case with due

diligence and that the length of the proceedings had infringed the

convention;

Whereas the Commission, after having declared the application

admissible on 12 July 1979 in so far as it related to the length of

his detention on remand and the length of the proceedings, expressed

in its report the opinion, by twelve votes to three, that in so far as

it is submitted to its examination, the applicant's detention on

remand has not lasted longer than the "reasonable time" provided for

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

unanimously that the length of the proceedings against the applicant

has not exceeded the "reasonable time" provided for in Article 6,

paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the convention and that therefore there has

not been in this case a violation of these two provisions;

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 has not been violation of the

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Freedoms.

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant