CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 20 mars 1972

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }  THE FACTS   The facts of the case as submitted by the applicant may be summarised as follows:   I.    The applicant is an Austrian citizen, born in 1930 and at present detained in prison at G. His application concerns the following criminal proceedings:   1. From his statements and the documents submitted by him, it appears that he was on .. December 1957 convicted by the Regional Court (Landesgericht) of I. on a charge of murder and sentenced to imprisonment for life.   The applicant accepted this judgement but now complains that he was wrongly convicted and sentenced.   2. On .. July 1958 the applicant was convicted by the Regional Court (Landesgericht ) of S. on charges of robbery and theft. He accepted this conviction.   His application for a retrial (Wiederaufnahme des Strafverfahrens) was dismissed by the Regional Court on .. July 1967 and, an appeal (Beschwerde), by the Court of Appeal (Oberlandesgericht) of L. on .. November 1967. A further petition for retrial was refused by the Regional Court on .. April 1969.   Affirming his innocence, the applicant complains that he was wrongly convicted in 1958.   3. On .. October 1968 the Regional Court (Kreisgericht) of S. convicted the applicant on a charge of false accusation and sentenced him to the penalty of "sleeping hard" ("hartes Lager") once every month over a period of six months.   The applicant's appeal (Berufung) was dismissed by the Court of Appeal of L. on .. December 1968.   Affirming his innocence, the applicant complains that he was again wrongly convicted and sentenced.   4. Criminal charges were brought by the applicant against a public prosecutor and against a witness in June 1970 but the Public Prosecutor's Offices (Staatsanwaltschaften) of L. and S. refused to prosecute.   II.   With regard to the proceedings mentioned under I, above, the applicant alleges violations of Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention.   III. By letter of 20 June 1971 the applicant informed the Commission that he intended to address himself to the press. In reply, he was reminded by letter of 29 June 1971 from the Commission's Secretary that the Commission meets in camera and that the case-files on applications, including correspondence and documentation, should not be made available to the public.   By letter of 3 January 1972 the applicant has requested the Commission:   - either, to allow him to publish certain documents concerning his   case, or - to discontinue its proceedings in this application.   THE LAW   As to the applicant's request for permission to publish documents relating to this application   Article 33 (Art. 33) of the Convention stipulates that the Commission shall meet in camera. This has been consistently interpreted by the Commission to mean that the contents of the case-files in all applications before it are to be treated as confidential and that, consequently, neither party to an application is authorised to divulge the contents of their written or oral pleadings in the case. All applicants are warned of this situation. As regards the stage of admissibility, the Commission's decisions declaring an application admissible, inadmissible or struck off the list of cases are alone available to the public. In applications which have been declared admissible, the Commission's reports to the Committee of Ministers drawn up under Article 30 (Art. 30) are published in accordance with the provisions of that Article. Reports drawn up under Article 31 (Art. 31) are published in pursuance of the provisions of Article 32 (3) (Art. 32-3) in fine. They may also be published, as the case may be, at the direction of the Court of Human Rights or, as a matter of practice subject to a few exceptions, with the authorization of the Committee of Ministers. Finally, the Commission may, at any stage of the proceedings, authorise its Secretary to issue press communiqués in cases of general interest. It follows that the Commission's present decision will be available for publication but that the Commission cannot authorise the applicant to publish in any form the submissions or documentation submitted by him, other than as mentioned in the text of this decision. There has been no press communiqué issued in this case.   As to the applicant's request that the proceedings should be discontinued   The Commission has noted the applicant's alternative request that the proceedings in this case should be discontinued. It finds no reasons of a general character affecting the observance of the Convention which would necessitate a further examination of this application.   For these reasons, the Commission:   1.    decides to refuse the applicant's request for permission to publish certain documents relating to this application   2.    decides to accept the applicant's request that the proceedings should be discontinued and, consequently, to strike this application off the list of cases