CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE PINHEIRO FARINHA, APPROVED BY JUDGES THÓR VILHJÁLMSSON AND SPIELMANN

(Translation)

I believe we should have added the following to paragraph 27:

"In these circumstances it is unnecessary to examine whether the six-month period began to run only on the date - 1 May 1987 - when Malta ’ s declaration under Article 25 (art. 25) gave the applicant access to the Commission."

The question remains open and the Court does not propose to decide it for the time being (see, mutatis mutandis, the Bozano judgment of 18 December 1986 , Series A no. 111, p. 22, para. 50 in fine). It will be decided at the proper time.

The text as worded could give the impression that the question has now been decided.

[*]  The case is numbered 33/1990/224/288.  The first number is the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the relevant year (second number).  The last two numbers indicate the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications to the Commission.

[*]   As amended by Article 11 of Protocol No. 8 (P8-11), which came into force on 1 January 1990 .

[*]    The amendments to the Rules of Court which entered into force on 1 April 1989 are applicable to the present case.

[*]  Note by the registry: For practical reasons this annex will appear   only with the printed version of the judgment (volume 210 of Series A of   the Publications of the Court), but a copy of the Commission's report is   obtainable from the registry.