CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 4 mars 1998

.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 }                        Application No. 30535/96                       by Jeremy WILSON                       against the United Kingdom          The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting in private on 4 March 1998, the following members being present:              MM     M.P. PELLONPÄÄ, President                  N. BRATZA                  E. BUSUTTIL                  A. WEITZEL                  C.L. ROZAKIS            Mrs    J. LIDDY            MM     L. LOUCAIDES                  B. CONFORTI                  I. BÉKÉS                  G. RESS                  A. PERENIC                  C. BÎRSAN                  K. HERNDL                  M. VILA AMIGÓ            Mrs    M. HION            Mr     R. NICOLINI              Mrs    M.F. BUQUICCHIO, 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 12 December 1995 by Jeremy WILSON against the United Kingdom and registered on 20 March 1996 under file No. 30535/96;        Having regard to:   -     the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of      the Commission;   -     the letter submitted by the respondent Government dated      19 December 1997 and the observations in reply submitted by the      applicant's representative on 20 January 1998;        Having deliberated;        Decides as follows:   THE FACTS        The applicant is a citizen of the United Kingdom, born in 1964, and at the time of the introduction of the application was detained in HMP Oxford. He is represented by Mr. S. Creighton, a solicitor practising in London.        The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.        The applicant was convicted of drug offences and sentenced to five years' imprisonment. Between March 1994 and August 1995, the applicant was receiving weekly psychiatric counselling for having suffered repeated sexual abuse by different perpetrators over a number of years in his childhood.        On 17 June 1995, in HMP The Mount where he was detained at that point in time, the applicant received an open visit from two former inmates. In the course of this visit, the applicant was passed a package by these visitors and asked to deliver it to another inmate at the prison.   The applicant accepted the package and placed it in his trousers.        Upon reflection, the applicant decided to return the package to the visitors. He left the table at which the visit was conducted and asked the supervising prison officer for a piece of paper on which he could write a note. While walking back to the table, he retrieved the package and passed it back to the visitors inside the piece of paper.        The visits room was also monitored by closed circuit television. It was recorded that the applicant accepted and concealed an item on his person, left the table and, upon return to the table, wrote on a piece of paper which he then passed to his visitors.        After the visit, the applicant was not allowed to regain his cell but was taken to the segregation unit. He was then strip searched in accordance with normal procedures and placed in a strip cell. No illicit articles were found on him.        As the applicant realised that it was suspected that he had concealed the package internally, he asked during the search on three occasions for a doctor to be called to conduct an internal examination in order to prove he had not concealed anything internally. He was informed that the doctor would not be called since it was weekend and the call-out fee was £60. When the applicant then asked how he could prove his innocence, he was told he could defecate in a bucket. The applicant agreed with this course of action.        A bucket was brought to the strip cell and the applicant defecated into it while being watched by two prison officers. When he presented the bucket to them, he was told that he himself had to go through the faeces to prove that there was nothing contained in them. The applicant's request to be given gloves for this purpose was refused. He then examined the faeces with his bare hands. Nothing was found.        After the search, the applicant was detained in the segregation unit for a further three days and placed on closed visits for two months.        Following a complaint by the applicant's representative, the Governor of HMP The Mount ordered an investigation of the events on 17 June 1995.        By letter of 2 August 1995, the Governor informed the applicant's representative that no grounds had been found to substantiate the applicant's allegations.   The Governor concluded that the two prison officers had acted professionally throughout.     COMPLAINT        The applicant complains that being required to defecate in front of two prison officers and then being required to examine the faeces with bare hands is humiliating and debasing from both a subjective and objective point of view and, therefore, contrary to Article 3 of the Convention.     PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION        The application was introduced on 12 December 1995 and registered on 20 March 1996.        On 21 May 1997 the Commission (First Chamber) decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government, pursuant to Rule 48 para. 2 (b) of the Rules of Procedure, and to invite them to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the application.     REASONS FOR THE DECISION        By letter of 28 August 1997 the Government informed the Commission that they had started friendly settlement negotiations and by following letter of 19 December 1997 the Government confirmed that a cheque had been sent to the applicant for the amount claimed by the applicant, and that payment of his solicitor's costs as submitted had been approved. On 20 January 1998 the applicant's representative confirmed the friendly settlement payment of £500 pounds to Mr Wilson and his submission of bill of costs in the sum of £1,106.25 to the Government on 9 December 1997.        In this situation the Commission finds that the matter which has been the subject of the application has been resolved within the meaning of Article 30 para. 1 (b) of the Convention.   The Commission, furthermore, having regard to Article 30 para. 1 in fine, finds no special circumstances regarding respect of human rights as defined in the Convention which require the continuation of the examination of the application.        For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,        DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OUT OF ITS LIST OF CASES.     M.F. BUQUICCHIO                                M.P. PELLONPÄÄ      Secretary                                     President to the First Chamber                          of the First Chamber