CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 6 juillet 1989

.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 }                        AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF                         Application No. 14762/89                       by Arne TREHOLT                       against Norway             The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 6 July 1989, the following members being present:                MM.   C. A. NØRGAARD, President                   J. A. FROWEIN                   S. TRECHSEL                   F. ERMACORA                   G. SPERDUTI                   E. BUSUTTIL                   A. S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                   A. WEITZEL                   H. G. SCHERMERS                   G. BATLINER                   J. CAMPINOS                   H. VANDENBERGHE              Sir   Basil HALL              MM.   F. MARTINEZ                   C.L. ROZAKIS              Mrs.   J. LIDDY              Mr.   L. LOUCAIDES                Mr.   H. C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission           Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;           Having regard to the application introduced on 6 February 1989 by Arne TREHOLT against Norway and registered on 8 March 1989 under file No. 14762/89;           Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;           Having deliberated;           Decides as follows:   THE FACTS           The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.           The applicant is a Norwegian citizen, born in 1942.   He is at present serving a twenty year prison sentence.   Before the Commission he is represented by Mr.   Ole Krarup, Copenhagen, Denmark.           On 20 January 1984 the applicant was arrested and charged with espionage.   On 20 June 1985 the applicant was found guilty of the charge brought against him and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment by the High Court (Eidsivating lagmannsrett).   The applicant appealed against this judgment to the Supreme Court (Høyesterett) but he later withdrew his appeal.   Instead he applied to the High Court for the reopening of his case.   However, his petition was rejected by the High Court on 11 February 1988 and this decision was upheld by the Supreme Court on 15 August 1988.   COMPLAINTS           The applicant invokes Article 6 of the Convention.   He is of the opinion that this provision has been violated both during the investigation of his case and during the trial in the High Court.   THE LAW           The applicant has invoked Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention complaining that this provision was violated during the investigation of his case and during his trial.           However, the Commission is not required to decide whether or not the facts alleged by the applicant disclose any appearance of a violation of this provision as Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention provides that the Commission "may only deal with a matter ... within a period of six months from the date on which the final decision was taken". According to the Commission's established case-law the "final decision" within the meaning of Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention refers only to the final decision involved in the exhaustion of all domestic remedies according to the generally recognised rules of international law.   In this respect the Commission recalls that it has constantly held that an application for the reopening of the proceedings or similar extraordinary remedies cannot, as a general rule, be taken into account in the application of Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention (cf. for example No. 10326/83, Dec. 6.10.83, D.R. 35 p. 218).           The Commission finds that, in the present case, the applicant's petition for a retrial was not an effective remedy under the generally recognised rules of international law.   Consequently, the decision regarding this petition cannot be taken into consideration in determining the date of the final decision for the purpose of applying the six months time-limit laid down in Article 26 (Art. 26).           The final decision regarding his conviction and sentence is accordingly the decision of the High Court which was given on 20 June 1985, whereas the present application was submitted to the Commission on 6 February 1989, that is more than six months after the date of this decision.   Furthermore, an examination of the case does not disclose the existence of any special circumstances which might have interrupted or suspended the running of that period.           It follows that the application has been introduced out of time and must be rejected under Article 27 para. 3 (Art. 27-3) of the Convention.           For these reasons, the Commission           DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE     Secretary to the Commission              President of the Commission           (H.C. KRÜGER)                            (C.A. NØRGAARD)