CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 1 juillet 1981

.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, under the terms of 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 Francis Schertenleib against Switzerland (No. 8339/78);   Whereas on 10 March 1981 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 22 August 1978, the applicant complained about the length of his detention on remand and of the criminal proceedings instituted against him, claiming that the judicial authorities' refusal to release him on bail was unjustified, that the judicial authorities had not conducted his case with due diligence and that the length of the proceedings had infringed the convention;   Whereas the Commission, after having declared the application admissible on 12 July 1979 in so far as it related to the length of his detention on remand and the length of the proceedings, expressed in its report the opinion, by twelve votes to three, that in so far as it is submitted to its examination, the applicant's detention on remand has not lasted longer than the "reasonable time" provided for in Article 5, paragraph 3 (art. 5-3), of the convention, and unanimously that the length of the proceedings against the applicant has not exceeded the "reasonable time" provided for in Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the convention and that therefore there has not been in this case a violation of these two provisions;   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 has not been violation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.