EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Application No. 21444/93
Rudolf-Peter Öhlinger
against
Austria
REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
(adopted on 14 January 1997)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. THE PARTIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
(paras. 1-3)
II. SUMMARY OF THE FACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
(paras. 4-5)
III. THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
(paras. 6-14)
IV. THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
(paras. 15-17)
ANNEX: DECISION ON THE ADMISSIBILITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
I. THE PARTIES
1. This Report, which is drawn up by the Commission in accordance with
Article 30 para. 1 of the Convention, concerns the application brought
by Rudolf-Peter Öhlinger against Austria. The applicant was an Austrian
citizen born in 1946. He was retired and at the time of the events was
serving a prison sentence at the Graz-Karlau prison.
2. In the proceedings before the Commission the applicant was
represented by Mr. H. Hofstätter, a lawyer practising in Graz.
3. The respondent Government were represented by their Agent,
Mr. C. Cede, Ambassador, Head of the International Law Department at
the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
II. SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
4. The facts of the case are set out in the Commission's decision on
admissibility of 2 July 1996, attached hereto as an appendix, and can
be summarised as follows:
5. In August 1990 the applicant was arrested and taken into detention
on remand. In January 1991 the Ried Regional Court (Landesgericht)
convicted him of bodily harm. The applicant introduced appeal
proceedings and requested his release from detention on remand. The
request for release was dismissed. In February 1991 the Linz Court of
Appeal (Oberlandesgericht) dismissed the applicant's appeal against the
refusal to release him from detention on remand but noted that in the
course of his arrest and being taking into detention on remand several
provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure had been disregarded.
Thereupon the applicant introduced an official liability action in
which he requested compensation for unlawful detention on remand. His
action was dismissed and appeal proceedings remained unsuccessful. The
applicant complained to the Commission about the unlawfulness of his
detention on remand in several respects and the refusal by the Austrian
authorities of his compensation claim regarding his detention on
remand.
III. THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
6. The application was introduced on 23 November 1992 and registered
on 26 February 1993.
7. On 12 October 1994 the Commission decided to communicate the
application to the respondent Government, pursuant to Rule 48
para. 2 (b) of the Rules of Procedure.
8. On 7 December 1994 the Commission granted the applicant legal
aid.
9. On 27 January 1995 the Government submitted their observations.
The observations in reply by the applicant were submitted on
11 February 1995. On 26 April 1995 these observations were supplemented
by counsel after the time-limit set for this purpose had expired.
10. On 2 July 1996 the Commission declared admissible the applicant's
complaints under Article 5 paras. 1 and 5 of the Convention and
declared inadmissible the remainder of the application.
11. By letter of 1 September 1996 the applicant informed the
Commission that he would be interested in a friendly settlement of the
case. The Secretariat's letter in reply of 18 September 1996 was
returned with the comment "deceased".
12. On further enquiry by the Secretariat with the parties, the
Government, on 6 November 1996, informed the Commission that on
15 September 1996 the applicant had died. On 11 November 1996 the
applicant's lawyer confirmed this information and submitted further
that no possible heirs of the applicant were known.
13. On 14 January 1997 the Commission decided to strike the present
application out of its list of cases, pursuant to Article 30 para. 1
(c) of the Convention.
14. It adopted the present Report and decided to transmit it to the
Committee of Ministers and the parties' representatives for information
and to publish it. The following members were present when the Report
was adopted:
Mr. S. TRECHSEL, President
Mrs. G.H. THUNE
Mrs. J. LIDDY
MM. E. BUSUTTIL
G. JÖRUNDSSON
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
J.-C. SOYER
H. DANELIUS
F. MARTINEZ
L. LOUCAIDES
J.-C. GEUS
B. MARXER
M.A. NOWICKI
I. CABRAL BARRETO
B. CONFORTI
N. BRATZA
I. BÉKÉS
J. MUCHA
D. SVÁBY
G. RESS
A. PERENIC
C. BÎRSAN
P. LORENZEN
K. HERNDL
E. BIELIUNAS
E.A. ALKEMA
M. VILA AMIGÓ
IV. THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION
15. The Commission notes that the applicant died on 15 September 1996
and that it is not known whether the applicant has any heirs and
whether in case any heirs be formally recognized they would express
their interest in pursuing the proceedings before the Commission.
16. In these circumstances, the Commission considers that it is no
longer justified to continue the examination of the application, within
the meaning of Article 30 para. 1 (c) of the Convention.
17. Moreover, as regards the issues raised in the present case, the
Commission finds no reasons of a general character affecting respect
for Human Rights, as defined in the Convention, which require the
further examination of the application by virtue of Article 30 para. 1
in fine of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,
DECIDES TO STRIKE APPLICATION No. 21444/93 OFF ITS LIST OF CASES;
ADOPTS THE PRESENT REPORT;
DECIDES TO SEND THE PRESENT REPORT to the Committee of Ministers for
information, to send it also to the parties' representatives, and to
publish it.
Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission
(H.C. KRÜGER) (S. TRECHSEL)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy