AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application No. 20572/92
by P. S.
against Switzerland
The European Commission of Human Rights (Second Chamber) sitting
in private on 12 October 1994, the following members being present:
MM. H. DANELIUS, Acting President
S. TRECHSEL
G. JÖRUNDSSON
J.-C. SOYER
H.G. SCHERMERS
Mrs. G.H. THUNE
MM. F. MARTINEZ
L. LOUCAIDES
J.-C. GEUS
M.A. NOWICKI
I. CABRAL BARRETO
J. MUCHA
D. SVÁBY
Mr. K. ROGGE, 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 21 May 1992 by
P. S. against Switzerland and registered on 2 September 1992 under file
No. 20572/92;
Having regard to :
- reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the
Commission;
- the observations submitted by the respondent Government on 4 May
1994 and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant on
4 July 1994;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, born in 1931, is a Swiss citizen residing at
Rothenthurm in Switzerland.
a. Particular circumstances of the case
I.
The applicant was involved in execution proceedings on account
of debts arising from mortgage bonds. He contested the execution by
introducing an action (Aberkennungsklage) with the Horgen District
Court (Bezirksgericht). In his submissions he threatened to kill three
judges involved in other proceedings if his action was not accepted.
In a letter addressed to the president of the governing board
(Verwaltungsratspräsident) of a bank the applicant further threatened
to kill four judges if he did not duly receive an answer to his letter.
In view thereof, the Zurich Court of Appeal (Obergericht) on
23 August 1991 convicted the applicant in appeal proceedings of
repeated attempted compulsion (wiederholte versuchte Nötigung) and
sentenced him unconditionally to three months' imprisonment.
The applicant filed a plea of nullity which the Zürich Court of
Cassation (Kassationsgericht) on 25 January 1992 declared inadmissible
as the applicant could file a plea of nullity with the Federal Court.
II.
Against the decision of the Court of Cassation the applicant
filed a public law appeal (staatsrechtliche Beschwerde) with the
Federal Court (Bundesgericht), alleging in particular that his
statements did not amount to compulsion. Previously, the applicant had
also filed a plea of nullity (Nichtigkeitsbeschwerde) with the Federal
Court against the judgment of the Zurich Court of Appeal, though the
plea of nullity remained suspended until the Zurich Court of Cassation
would give its decision.
On 20 February 1992 the President of the Court of Cassation
(Kassationshof) of the Federal Court ordered the applicant to pay
advance court costs of 2,000 SFr for the public law appeal and of 2,000
SFr for the plea of nullity. The order stated that non-payment within
the time-limit would result in the inadmissibility of the remedies.
The applicant did not pay the court costs. On 3 March 1992 the
applicant wrote to the President of the Court of Cassation of the
Federal Court, stating that the latter was not competent to impose
court costs in respect of the public law appeal.
On 26 March 1992 the Court of Cassation of the Federal Court
rejected the applicant's public law appeal and plea of nullity as the
applicant had not paid the advance court costs. The first page of the
decision stated as the subject matter "Criminal Proceedings; assessment
of evidence; repeated attempted compulsion" ("Strafverfahren;
Beweiswürdigung; wiederholte versuchte Nötigung").
b. Relevant domestic law
Before the Federal Court (Bundesgericht), a public law appeal
(staatsrechtliche Beschwerde) serves to complain about the violation
of constitutional rights, inter alia procedural rights (see Section 84