CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 15 juin 1992

.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 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),        Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Koendjbiharie case delivered on 25 October 1990 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;        Recalling that the case originated in an application against the Netherlands lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 18 March 1985 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by Mr Jonas Mohamed Rafiek Koendjbiharie, a Dutch national, who complained that a decision concerning extension of his psychiatric confinement was taken more than four months after the lodging of the relevant application;        Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 13 December 1989;        Whereas in its judgment of 25 October 1990 the Court:   -     held unanimously that there had been a violation of      Article 5, paragraph 4 (art. 5-4), of the Convention      as the Court of Appeal of The Hague failed to rule      "speedily";   -     held by eight votes to one that it was unnecessary to      examine the other complaints based on Article 5      (art. 5);   -     held unanimously that it was also unnecessary to examine      the complaints initially submitted by the applicant and      based on Articles 3, 6 and 14 (art. 3, art. 6, art. 14);   -     held unanimously that the Netherlands were to pay to      the applicant the sum of 18 989,62 Dutch guilders less      12 397,50 French francs in respect of costs and      expenses;   -     dismissed unanimously the remainder of the claim for just      satisfaction;        Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention;        Having invited the Government of the Netherlands   to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 25 October 1990, having regard to its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;        Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the Netherlands gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;        Having satisfied itself that the Government of the Netherlands has paid to the applicant the sum provided for in the judgment,        Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of the Netherlands, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.                   Appendix to Resolution DH(92)25     Information provided by the Government of the Netherlands        during the examination of the Koendjbiharie case                  by the Committee of Ministers        The Act of 19 November 1986, which came into force on 1 September 1988, amended the Criminal Code with regard to the special provisions applying to persons suffering from a mental deficiency or mental illness that are placed by the judge at the Government's disposal for treatment.        Under Section 509.t, paragraph 1, of the Criminal Code read in the light of Section 509.o, paragraph 1, the court to which an application for prolongation of the confinement has been submitted by the crown prosecutor must give a decision not later than two months after expiry of the current or preceding hospital order.        The sole exception to this rule is laid down in Section 509.t, paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code, which grants the court, subject to certain conditions, a further period of three months within   which to decide on the application for a prolongation.        Furthermore, Section 509.v, paragraph 1, of the Criminal Code provides that the person placed at the Government's disposal has henceforth the possibility of lodging an appeal against the extension decision, except if the extension was granted for the first time and for one year only.        The Government of the Netherlands is of the view that the existence of this option of appeal will ensure compliance with the time-limits specified above since the Arnhem Court of Appeal will have to determine the consequences to be drawn from any non-compliance with the said time limits taking into account, inter alia, the judgment that the Court delivered in the present case.        The sum awarded to the applicant by the Court was paid on 28 November 1990.