CEDH · CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG — 14 janvier 1997

.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 }                    EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS                      Application No. 25085/94                          Grzegorz SAWICKI                               against                               Poland                      REPORT OF THE COMMISSION                    (adopted on 14 January 1997)                          TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                             Page   INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1   PART I   : STATEMENT OF THE FACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3   PART II : SOLUTION REACHED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4                            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 Grzegorz Sawicki against Poland on 31 September 1993.   It was registered on 6 September 1994 under file No. 25085/94.   2.    The Government of Poland were represented by their Agent, Mr. Krzysztof Drzewicki of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.   3.    On 6 July 1995 the Commission declared admissible the applicant's complaint that his correspondence with the Commission had been opened and delayed by prison authorities.   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."   4.    The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 14 January 1997 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.   5.    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           Mrs. M. HION                               PART I                       STATEMENT OF THE FACTS   6.    The applicant, a Polish citizen born in 1954, is a carpenter currently serving a prison sentence in Plock prison in Poland.   7.    On 20 May 1993 the Wloclawek District Court (S*d Rejonowy) convicted the applicant of attempted theft and sentenced him to three years' imprisonment and a fine of three million zlotys with 30 days' imprisonment in default.   8.    The applicant lodged an appeal against this decision.   He complained that the District Court had refused to hear one witness, who had been heard in the course of the investigation, and to inspect the scene of the crime.   He also complained about the assessment of evidence by the District Court.   9.    On 18 November 1993 the Wloclawek Regional Court (S*d Wojewódzki) dismissed the appeal.   On 12 April 1994 the Minister of Justice refused leave for an extraordinary appeal.   10.   The Commission's Secretariat sent letters to the applicant on 24 January 1994, 24 March 1994, 25 July 1994, 8 September and 6 October 1994.   The letter of 24 March 1994 was opened by the prison guard in Fordon prison by mistake.   She realised that the letter was not subject to censorship.   After the applicant complained, she explained that the opening of the letter was due to an administrative error and apologised.   The letter of 8 September 1994 was handed to the applicant with a delay.   The letter of 6 October 1994 was received at the Fordon prison on 12 October 1994 and served on the applicant on 13 October 1994.   The letters posted in January and July were stopped by the prison authorities and handed to him with delays of approximately twenty days.   The prison authorities posted the applicant's letters to the Commission only upon his insistent requests.   11.   The admissible part of the application related to the applicant's complaint under Article 8 of the Convention about the interference with his correspondence with the Commission.                               PART II                            SOLUTION REACHED   12.   Following the decision on the admissibility of the application, the Commission 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.   13.   In accordance with the usual practice, the Secretary, acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.   14.   On 25 September 1996 the applicant notified the Commission that on 9 September 1996 the parties had reached a friendly settlement in which the Government agreed to transfer the applicant to another prison chosen by him and apologised for the interference with his correspondence.   On 30 September 1996 the Government notified the Commission accordingly and informed it that the applicant had been transferred to Plock prison.   15.   At its session on 14 January 1997, 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.   16.   For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.           H.C. KRÜGER                          S. TRECHSEL          Secretary                         President      to the Commission                     of the Commission