CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 29 octobre 1997

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s1E59FF54 { margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:10pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s35F1F2CB { margin-top:10pt; margin-bottom:10pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s995BFA6B { margin-top:10pt; margin-bottom:5pt } INTERIM RESOLUTION DH (97) 515 HUMAN RIGHTS APPLICATION No.   21967/93 SÁRKÖZY AGAINST HUNGARY (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 29 October 1997 at the 605th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)         The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article   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 on 6 March 1997, by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 19 April 1993 by Mr   Sandor Sárközy against Hungary (Application No.   21967/93);         Whereas on 9 April 1997 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, of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article   48 of the Convention;         Whereas in his application, as declared admissible by the Commission on 5 July 1995, the applicant complained of the conditions of his detention which would amount to inhuman and degrading treatment, of the violation of his right to respect for his correspondence by the Budapest prison authorities, and of the absence of an effective remedy before national authority to complain about the violation of his rights under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention;         Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article   8, of the Convention as a result of the opening of the Commission's letter to the applicant dated 23 June 1993; unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of the remainder of correspondence issues; unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article 3 of the Convention and, by twenty-six votes to five, that there had been no violation of Article 13, in conjunction with Article 3, of the Convention and no violation of Article   13, in conjunction with Article 8, of the Convention;         Whereas, at the 605th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies the Committee of Ministers, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1, of the Convention, and agreed with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, by decision adopted on 29 October 1997, that there had been in this case a violation of Article 8, of the Convention, as a result of the opening of the Commission's letter to the applicant dated 23 June 1993, that there had been no violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of the remainder of correspondence issues, that there had been no violation of Article 3 of the Convention, that there had been no violation of Article 13, in conjunction with Article 3 of the Convention and no violation of Article   13, in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention,           Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case;         Decides to pursue the examination of the present case, in accordance with Article   32 of the Convention, with a view to adopting the final resolution.