CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 12 novembre 1971

.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 relating to the application lodged by Mr. Peter Scheichelbauer, an Austrian national, against the Government of Austria (No. 2645/65);   Whereas the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers on 8 February 1971 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 introduced on 10 June 1965, Mr Peter Scheichelbauer complained of violation of several articles of the Convention alleged to have taken place during the judicial proceedings instituted against him in Austria;   Whereas the Commission, on 19 July 1968, rejected certain parts of the application as being inadmissible and on 3 October 1969 declared admissible the applicant's complaint alleging violation of the right to a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 (art. 6) of the Convention owing to the use of the recording on a magnetic tape of a conversation between the applicant and his co-defendant as evidence before the Vienna Regional Criminal Court;   Whereas the Commission during its examination of the merits of the case considered that the Commission was not required in the present case to decide the question whether the tape recordings of a private conversation unbeknown to the participants or one of them constitutes in principle an interference with privacy; the problem before the Commission was only whether the use by the Austrian court of the recording in evidence constituted a violation in the present case of the applicant's right to a fair hearing within the meaning of Article 6 (1) (art. 6-1) of the Convention;   Sharing this view of the Commission and considering therefore that the only question to be decided is whether in this particular case the applicant was granted a fair hearing, as guaranteed by Article 6 (1) (art. 6-1) of the Convention;   Whereas the Commission also considered the further allegation of the applicant that if the use of the tape recording as evidence was contrary to the Convention, there was also a violation of Article 13 (art. 13), since, according to him, the Code of Criminal Procedure made no provision for appeal in such cases;   Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1) of the Convention:   (a)    by seven votes to four, that in this case there was no violation of Article 6 (1) (art. 6-1) of the Convention;   (b)    by six votes to five that since the applicant's rights under other articles of the Convention had not been violated in this case, Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention had not been violated;   Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1) of the Convention,   Decides that in this case there was no violation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.