Search
document

Document text Analytics

KÖPLINGER AGAINST AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 1850/63 • ECHR ID: 001-49208

Document date: May 1, 1969

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

KÖPLINGER AGAINST AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 1850/63 • ECHR ID: 001-49208

Document date: May 1, 1969

Cited paragraphs only

The Committee of Ministers,

Having regard to Article 32 (art. 32) of the European Convention for

the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter

called "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 Rudolf Köplinger, an Austrian

national, against the Government of Austria (No. 1850/63);

Whereas the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of

Ministers on 21 November 1968 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 Court in

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

Whereas, in his application introduced on 17 December 1962 and

registered on 8 April 1963, and in subsequent correspondence

Rudolf Köplinger complained of violations of Articles 5, 6 and 13 of

the Convention (art. 5, art. 6, art. 13), alleged to have taken place

during his detention pending trial and during the judicial proceedings

instituted against him in Austria;

Whereas the Commission on 29 March 1966 declared the application

admissible insofar as it related to alleged violations of Article 5,

paragraph 4 (art. 5-4) and of paragraphs 1 and 3 (b) of Article 6

(art. 6-1, art. 6-3-b) of the Convention;

Whereas the Commission during its examination of the merits of

the case considered:

(a) whether the procedure in dealing with the applicant's request for

conditional release, in particular as regards the alleged violation of

the principle of "equality of arms" was in conformity with Article 5,

paragraph 4 in conjunction with Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 5-4,

art. 6-1) of the Convention;

(b) whether the applicant's case was heard within a reasonable time

in accordance with Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1);

preparation of his defence as required by Article 6, paragraph 3 (b)

(art. 6-3-b) of the Convention and, in particular, whether there was a

violation of that provision because of the many changes in the lawyers

appointed to defend him by the Court, and because the prison

authorities did not allow him to bring his manuscripts and his

annotated documents with him when he was taken to the visitors' room

of the prison where he was detained to meet his legal representative;

Whereas the Commission on 4 October 1967, having received the

Sub-Commission's report, adjourned its consideration of the case

pending the outcome of the proceedings before the Court of Human

Rights in the "Neumeister Case";

Whereas the Commission, in its report, expressed the following

opinion;

(i) unanimously that there was no violation of Article 5, paragraph 4

in conjunction with Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 5-4, art. 6-1) of the

Convention;

(ii) by nine votes to four that the period under consideration did not

exceed the reasonable time envisaged in Article 6, paragraph 1

(art. 6-1) and that consequently that provision had not been violated;

(iii) by eight votes to five that there was no violation of Article 6,

paragraph 3 (b) (art. 6-3-b) of the Convention by reason of the

changes in the legal representation and by ten votes to three that

this provision had not been violated by reason of the fact that the

applicant was prevented from taking certain documents with him when he

met his legal representative;

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

(art. 32-1) of the Convention;

Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance

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

Decides that in this case there has been no violation of the

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Freedoms.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant