SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE DE MEYER

(Translation)

In my view the additional complaint invoked at the hearing by counsel for the applicant [*] raised a question not of jurisdiction, but of admissibility.

The Court undoubtedly had jurisdic tion to examine this complaint [*]  . It could at the most decide that it was no longer admissible at this stage of the proceedings.

[*]  The case is numbered 56/1990/247/318.  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 came into force on 1 April 1989 are applicable to this case.

[*]  Note by the Registrar: For practical reasons this annex will appear only with the printed version of the judgment (volume 221 of Series A of the Publications of the Court), but a copy of the Commission's report is obtainable from the registry.

[*]  Paragraph 26 of the judgment.

[*]   See the De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp judgment of 18 June 1971 , Series A no. 12, pp. 29-30, paras . 47-52 (in particular para. 49).