CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 25 octobre 1961

.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 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, and relating to the Application lodged by Bjørn Schouw Nielsen, a Danish national, against the Government of Denmark;   Whereas the Commission transmitted the said Report to the Committee of Ministers on 28 April 1961, 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, B.S. Nielsen complains of several violations of the Convention alleged to have taken place during the judicial proceedings, as a result of which he was sentenced to imprisonment for life on the grounds of having planned and instigated by various means including hypnosis, in 1950 a robbery of a bank and in 1951 an attempted robbery of a bank, and the murder of two bank-clerks, committed by a co-accused;   Whereas the Commission, having rejected part of the Application as inadmissible, retained as admissible, with the purpose of establishing the facts and formulating an opinion regarding them, the following two issues;   i)    Whether the Applicant had been informed in detail of the nature and the cause of the accusation against him, within the meaning of Article 6, paragraph (3) (a) (art. 6-3-a) of the Convention;   ii)   Whether the Applicant had been granted a fair hearing within the meaning of Article 6 (art. 6) of the Convention, in the Danish Courts, viz:   a)    the High Court and the Supreme Court;   b)    the Special Court of Revision of Denmark;   Whereas the Commission, in its Report, unanimously expressed the following opinion on these two issues:   i)    "that the Applicant was informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him in sufficient detail and that in this respect there was no violation on the part of the Respondent Government of Article 6, paragraph (3) (a) (art. 6-3-a) of the Convention";   ii)   that   a)    considered as a whole, the criminal proceedings brought against Nielsen in the Danish Courts (the High Court and the Supreme Court) "do not fall short of the standard required by Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1) as to the right of every accused to have a fair trial";   b)    the findings as regards the proceedings before the Special Court of Revision in Denmark "disclosed no breach of the Convention";   Having considered the case;   Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32 paragraph (1) (art. 32-1) 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.