AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application No. 21784/93
by Hassib KAHIL
against Greece
The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting
in private on 28 February 1995, the following members being present:
Mrs. J. LIDDY, Acting President
MM. C.L. ROZAKIS
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
B. CONFORTI
N. BRATZA
I. BÉKÉS
E. KONSTANTINOV
G. RESS
Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber
Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection
of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 10 February 1993
by Hassib KAHIL against Greece and registered on 30 April 1993 under
file No. 21784/93;
Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules
of Procedure of the Commission;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant is a Lebanese citizen born in 1961 in Lebanon.
The facts of the case, as they have been submitted by the
applicant, may be summarised as follows:
On 5 May 1989 the applicant was arrested in Athens in connection
with drug offences. He claims that he was beaten by the police officers
who arrested him.
The applicant was detained on remand until 11 May 1990, when he
was found guilty of selling drugs and sentenced to life imprisonment
by the three-member Court of Appeal (trimeles efeteio) of Athens, the
court having found that he was not a drug addict.
On 9 July 1990 the applicant requested that he be allowed to
continue to serve his sentence in the Koridallos prison to be able to
visit his wife who was also detained there. On 27 September 1990 he was
transferred to the prison of Patras.
On 28 January 1991 the applicant was diagnosed as suffering from
haemorrhoids and gastritis and an operation was recommended.
On 5 March and 1 April 1991 the applicant applied to be
transferred to the prison of Koridallos to enable him to prepare his
appeal, due to be heard on 22 May 1991, and to be near his wife who was
detained in the same prison. He was eventually transferred to the
Koridallos prison five days before the appeal hearing.
On 22 May 1991 the hearing was adjourned. On 11 November 1991 the
applicant asked for permission to visit his wife. Before receiving a
reply, he was transferred back to Patras.
On 9 March 1992 the applicant was interrogated by the Director
of the prison of Patras in connection with a window which had been
found broken. He claims that he was beaten by prison officers in the
course of the interrogation. The applicant was placed in isolation for
ten days and was charged with attempting to escape.
Between 5 and 13 July 1992 the applicant was hospitalised in the
General Hospital of Patras.
On 18 November 1992 the applicant's sentence was reduced to 8
years imprisonment by the five-member Court of Appeal (pentameles
efeteio) of Athens. Considering the applicant to be a drug addict, the
court ordered that he be transferred to a disintoxication centre.
The applicant appealed in cassation. The hearing of his appeal
was fixed for 27 April 1993.
On 3 May 1993 the three-member first instance criminal court
(trimeles plimeleiodikeio) of Patras rejected the applicant's
application to be transferred to a disintoxication centre.
On 29 June 1993 the applicant was due to appear before a first
instance criminal court in Patras to be tried for attempting to escape.
COMPLAINTS
1. The applicant complains of the fairness of the criminal
proceedings against him, of his conviction, and of the fact that he is
detained in an ordinary prison, notwithstanding the decision of the
second instance court ordering his detention in a disintoxication
centre. He invokes in this connection Article 5, 6 and 7 of the
Convention.
2. He further complains that he does not receive the required
medical treatment, that he has been ill-treated on two occasions by
police and prison officers, that he is not allowed to visit his wife
and that he was placed in solitary confinement despite his health
condition. He invokes in this connection Articles 2, 3, 4 and 8 of the
Convention.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The Commission notes that by letter of 20 October 1993, addressed
to the prison of Patras where he was being detained, the applicant was
requested to provide additional information to the Commission
concerning the issue of exhaustion of domestic remedies and to furnish
copies of certain court decisions. The applicant has failed to reply,
despite reminders sent to him on 11 July 1994, 14 October 1994 and
16 December 1994.
The Commission concludes under Article 30 para. 1 (a) of the
Convention that the applicant no longer intends to pursue his petition.
It further considers that respect for Human Rights as defined in the
Convention does not require it to continue the examination of the
application.
For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously
DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OUT OF THE LIST OF CASES.
Secretary Acting President
to the First Chamber of the First Chamber
(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (J. LIDDY)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy