Search
document

Document text Analytics

THE CHAHAL FAMILY v. THE UNITED KINGDOMPARTIALLY DISSENTING OPINION OF MR. TRECHSEL

Doc ref: • ECHR ID:

Document date: June 27, 1995

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

THE CHAHAL FAMILY v. THE UNITED KINGDOMPARTIALLY DISSENTING OPINION OF MR. TRECHSEL

Doc ref: • ECHR ID:

Document date: June 27, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

PARTIALLY DISSENTING OPINION OF MR. TRECHSEL

While I am generally in agreement with the majority of the

Commission, I voted against the conclusion set out in para. 129,

according to which it was not necessary to examine the complaints under

Article 5 para. 4 of the Convention.

In my view the finding that the first applicant's detention was

not in conformity with the requirements of Article 5 para.1 of the

Convention does not cover the issue of habeas corpus proceedings. The

need for such a control is particularly acute whenever problems arise

under the first paragraph of Article 5.

I also note that the opinion expressed by the majority is hardly

in conformity with the Court's case-law. In this respect I refer to the

Bouamar judgment (Eur. Court H.R., Bouamar judgment of

29 February 1988, Series A no. 129) where violations both of Article 5

paras. 1 and 4 of the Convention were found.

Having regard to the facts of the present case, it must be that

Article 5 para. 4 was violated for the same reasons as those put

forward in this Report with regard to the violation of Article 13 of

the Convention.

APPENDIX I

HISTORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS

Date Item

_________________________________________________________________

27.07.93 Introduction of application

04.08.93 Registration of application

Examination of admissibility

30.07.93 Rule 36 granted

08.09.93 Commission's decision to communicate the

case to the respondent Government and to

invite the parties to submit observations

on admissibility and merits

23.12.93 Government's observations

07.04.94 Applicants' observations in reply

16.05.94 Commission's decision to hold a hearing

22.07.94 President's grant of legal aid

01.09.94 Hearing on admissibility and merits.

Commission's decision to declare

application in part admissible and in part

inadmissible

Examination of the merits

12.09.94 Decision on admissibility transmitted to

parties. Invitation to parties to submit

further observations on the merits

28.10.94 Applicants' observations

23.12.94 Government's observations

14.01.95 Commission's consideration of state of

proceedings

31.03.95 Applicants' further observations

20.05.95 Commission's consideration of state of

proceedings

27.06.95 Commission's deliberations on the merits,

final vote and consideration of text of

the Report. Adoption of Report

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant