Application No. 19957/92
by Jürgen Maria LIPTHAY
against Austria
The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting
in private on 6 September 1995, the following members being present:
Mr. C.L. ROZAKIS, President
Mrs. J. LIDDY
MM. E. BUSUTTIL
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
G.B. REFFI
B. CONFORTI
N. BRATZA
I. BÉKÉS
E. KONSTANTINOV
G. RESS
A. PERENIC
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 28 April 1992 by
Jürgen Maria LIPTHAY against Austria and registered on 11 May 1992
under file No. 19957/92;
Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules
of Procedure of the Commission;
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent
Government on 3 October 1994;
Having regard to the Commission's consideration of the state of
proceedings of 17 January 1995;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The facts, as they have been submitted by the applicant, may be
summarised as follows.
The applicant is an Austrian citizen, born in 1969 and currently
detained in Salzburg. Before the Commission, he is represented by
Mr. P. Lechenauer, a lawyer practising in Salzburg.
On 13 February 1992 the Investigating Judge at the Salzburg
Regional Court (Landesgericht) issued a warrant for the applicant's
arrest on the suspicion of having, inter alia, stored and distributed
leaflets disseminating national-socialist ideas. On 14 February 1992
the applicant was taken into detention on remand on the grounds of a
danger of collusion with his co-suspect and the danger of repetition
of the offences. On 19 February 1992 the Judges' Chamber (Ratskammer)
at the Salzburg Regional Court dismissed the applicant's request for
release. On the same day, applicant's counsel requested to be granted
access to the files, he was given access on 6 March 1992.
On 5 July 1993 the Salzburg Court of Assizes convicted the
applicant of offences under the National Socialism Prohibition Act and
sentenced him to a 18 months' prison term. The applicant was found to
have furthered an association aimed at undermining, in a national-
socialist manner, the independence and sovereignty of the State and to
have performed activities inspired by national-socialist ideas.
On 21 December 1993 the Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof)
dismissed the applicant's plea of nullity (Nichtigkeitsbeschwerde) and
his appeal (Berufung).
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention
about his detention on remand and the criminal proceedings against him.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
The application was introduced on 28 April and registered on
11 May 1992.
On 29 June 1994 the Commission decided to communicate the
application to the respondent Government for observations on the
admissibility and merits.
On 3 October 1994 the Government submitted their observations.
By letter of 10 October 1994 the Commission's Secretariat
forwarded these observations to the applicant's representative. In
accordance with the Commission's instructions, a time-limit expiring
on 28 November 1994 was fixed for any observations in reply.
By letter of 6 December 1994 the applicant's representative was
reminded that the time-limit had meanwhile expired. He was requested
to inform the Commission immediately whether he still intended to file
observations in reply and, if so, explain the reasons for the delay.
On 19 December 1994 the applicant's representative acknowledged
receipt of the letter of 6 December 1994 and applied for legal aid in
the Commission proceedings. There was no explanation as to the delay.
Having considered the state of the proceedings on 17 January
1995, the Commission decided to set the applicant a new time-limit of
four weeks for the presentation of his observations in reply and to
provide him with the necessary legal aid forms to be filled in and
returned within the same time-limit.
The applicant's representative was informed accordingly by letter
of 17 January 1995, the new time-limits expired on 20 February 1995.
There was no reaction on the applicant's part.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The Commission notes that the applicant, represented by counsel,
did not react when invited to submit observations in reply to the
Government's observations. When reminded following the expiry of the
relevant time-limit, the applicant's representative applied for legal
aid without furnishing any explanation as to the delay. There was
again no reaction to the Commission's letter of 17 January 1995.
In these circumstances, the Commission concludes pursuant to
Article 30 para. 1 (a) and (c) of the Convention that the applicant
does not intend to pursue his application and that it is, therefore,
no longer justified to continue the examination of the petition.
Moreover, there are no reasons of a general character affecting respect
for Human Rights as defined in this Convention which require the
further examination of this application.
For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,
DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.
Secretary to the First Chamber President of the First Chamber
(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (C.L. ROZAKIS)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy