CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 13 octobre 1978

.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 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "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 Heinz Krzycki against the Federal Republic of Germany (No. 7629/76);   Whereas on 24 April 1978 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers 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 European Court of Human Rights, in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the convention;   Whereas in his application introduced on 19 August 1976, the applicant alleged a violation of Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), of the convention, arguing that the Regional Court's decision revoking his conditional release had been unlawful and consequently his subsequent detention was likewise unlawful, and claimed compensation under Article 5, paragraph 5 (art. 5-5), of the convention;   Whereas the Commission, after having declared the application admissible on 14 July 1977, has expressed, in its report, unanimously the opinion that Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), of the convention had not been violated because the applicant's preventive detention was covered by sub-paragraph a (art. 5-1-a) of this provision and that the applicant had no claims under Article 5, paragraph 5 (art. 5-5), of the convention;   Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the convention;   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.