CEDH · CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG — 1 avril 1992

.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 } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both }                      EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS                               FIRST   CHAMBER                          Application No. 15736/89                                     D.                                   against                                 SWITZERLAND                          REPORT OF THE COMMISSION                          (adopted on 1 April 1992)                              TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                             Page         INTRODUCTION .............................................         1     PART I:   STATEMENT OF THE FACTS ..........................         2     PART II: SOLUTION REACHED ................................         3                                  INTRODUCTION     1.     This Report relates to the application introduced under Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by D. against Switzerland on 13 September 1989. It was registered on 7 November 1989 under file No. 15736/89.         The applicant was represented by Mr. K. Mader, a lawyer practising in Zurich.         The Government of Switzerland were represented by their Deputy Agent, Mr. Ph. Boillat, Head of the European law and International Affairs Section of the Federal Office of Justice.   2.     On 8 July 1991 the Commission (First Chamber) declared the application admissible.   It then proceeded to carry out its task under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:         "In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to       it:         a.    it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake            together with the representatives of the parties an            examination of the petition and, if need be, an            investigation, for the effective conduct of which the            States concerned shall furnish all necessary facilities,            after an exchange of views with the Commission;         b.    it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of            the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly            settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human            Rights as defined in this Convention."   3.     The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 1 April 1992 it adopted this Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.         The following members were present when the Report was adopted:              MM.    J.A. FROWEIN, President of the First Chamber                  F. ERMACORA                  G. SPERDUTI                  E. BUSUTTIL                  A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK            Sir    Basil HALL            Mr.    C.L. ROZAKIS            Mrs.   J. LIDDY            MM.    M. PELLONPÄÄ                  B. MARXER                                         PART   I                               STATEMENT OF THE FACTS     4.     The applicant is a Yugoslav born in 1955 and resident at Vinkovci in Yugoslavia.   5.     On 13 March 1987 the applicant was remanded in custody by the Zurich District Attorney's Office (Bezirksanwaltschaft) on suspicion of having committed, inter alia, the offence of fraud.   The warrant of arrest was signed by District Attorney L.   6.     On 3 June 1987 the District Attorney's Office indicted the applicant before the Zurich District Court (Bezirksgericht) of the various offences.   The indictment was signed by the District Attorney L.   On 26 June 1987 the Zurich District Court convicted the applicant of fraud, forging documents and disregarding an expulsion order and sentenced him to twelve months' imprisonment.   7.     Upon appeal, the Zurich Court of Appeal on 19 January 1988 sentenced the applicant to 15 months' penal servitude and a fine of 1,000.-   SFr.   The applicant was also ordered to leave Switzerland for ten years.   8.     The applicant's subsequent plea of nullity (Nichtigkeits- beschwerde) was dismissed on 13 June 1988 by the Zurich Court of Cassation (Kassationsgericht).   9.     On 14 March 1989 the Federal Court dismissed the applicant's public law appeal (staatsrechtliche Beschwerde).   10.    Before the Commission the applicant complained that, contrary to Article 5 para. 3 of the Convention, the same district Attorney first decided on the applicant's detention and later indicted him.   Thus the District Attorney could not be regarded as having been independent as required by that provision.                                      PART   II                                  SOLUTION REACHED   11.    Following the decision on the admissibility of the application, the Commission (First Chamber) placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to submit any proposals they wished to make.   12.    In accordance with the usual practice, the Chamber Secretary, acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.   13.    The following agreement was accepted by the applicant in a letter dated 8 February 1992 and by the Government in a letter dated 2 March 1992.     [English]         "1.   The Swiss Confederation will make an ex gratia payment of            5,000 SFr. as compensation for all damages and the costs            and expenses incurred by the applicant in Switzerland and            in Strasbourg as a result of the facts which gave rise to            the introduction of Application No. 15736/89 before the            European Commission of Human Rights.         2.    The settlement is reached by the parties in view of the            changes, by popular referendum, in the Code of Criminal            Proceedings of the Canton of Zurich, in particular paras.            58 et seq.   According to the Resolution of the Committee of            Ministers of 13 December 1991 (DH (91) 40), as a result of            these changes the Swiss Government complied with its            obligations under Article 53 of the Convention following            the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the            case of Huber v. Switzerland (judgment of 23 October 1990,            Series A no. 188).         3.    In view of the undertaking referred to in paragraph 1, the            applicant considers Application No. 15736/89 lodged with            the European Commission of Human Rights, as settled.         4.    He also states that he will lodge no other claims before            national or international authorities on the basis of the            facts which gave rise to the introduction of the said            application."     [French]         "1.   La Confédération suisse versera, à titre gracieux, la somme            de 5,000 F.S. à titre d'indemnité forfaitaire, toutes            causes de préjudice confondues, comprenant en particulier            les frais et dépens encourus par le requérant en Suisse et            à Strasbourg à raison des faits qui ont donné lieu à            l'introduction, devant la Commission européenne des Droits            de l'Homme, de la requête No 15736/89.         2.    Le règlement auquel sont parvenues les parties tient compte            des changements intervenus, par referendum populaire, dans            le Code de Procédure Pénale du Canton de Zurich, notamment            ses articles 58 et suivants.   Selon la Résolution du Comité            des Ministres du 13 décembre 1991 (DH (91) 40) et en raison            de ces changements, le Gouvernement suisse s'est conformé            à ses obligations découlant, selon l'article 53 de la            Convention, du jugement de la Cour Eur. D.H. dans l'affaire            Huber c/Suisse (arrêt du 23 octobre 1990, Série A no. 188).         3.    Compte tenu de l'engagement mentionné sous chiffre 1., le            requérant considère la requête No 15736/89 introduite            devant la Commission européenne des Droits de l'Homme comme            réglée.         4.    Il déclare en outre qu'il ne fera pas valoir d'autres            prétentions devant les autorités nationales ou            internationales à raison des faits qui ont donné lieu à            l'introduction de ladite requête."   14.    At its session on 1 April 1992, the Commission noted that the parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement. It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.   15.    For these reasons, the Commission adopted this Report.       Secretary to the First Chamber           President of the First Chamber               (M. de SALVIA)                             (J.A. FROWEIN)