CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 9 avril 1965

.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 }  The Committee of Ministers,   Having regard to Article 32 (art. 32) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention");   Having regard to the Report drawn up by the European Commission of Human Rights relating to the Application lodged by Oskar Plischke against Austria (No. 1446/62);   Whereas the Commission transmitted the said Report to the Committee of Ministers on 21st December 1964, and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the Convention has elapsed without this case having been brought before the Court in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention;   Whereas, in his Application, the Applicant complains of several violations of the Convention alleged to have taken place during judicial proceedings instituted against him in Austria, as a result of which, in December 1961, he was convicted of certain criminal offences and sentenced to three years' imprisonment;   Whereas the Commission declared the Application admissible in so far as it relates to alleged violations of Article 6, paragraphs 1 and 3 (c) (art. 6-1, art. 6-3-c), of the Convention;   Whereas the Commission's said decision declaring the Application admissible had the effect in Austrian law of entitling the Applicant to have the proceedings re-opened before the Supreme Court of Austria under the provisions of the Federal Act of 27th March 1963 on the re-opening of appeal proceedings in criminal cases (Bundesgesetzblatt, 1963, No. 66);   Whereas, in its Report, the Commission states that the Applicant availed himself of the right and that his sentence was reduced from three years' imprisonment to two and a half years' imprisonment;   Whereas the Commission considered that as a result of this development it was no longer required to express an opinion whether or not the circumstances in which the applicant was convicted and sentenced in December 1961 constituted a violation of the Convention and that, without following the procedure of setting up a Sub-Commission, it might limit itself to stating that in the final resort the Applicant's case received a fair hearing in accordance with the requirement of Article 6 (art. 6) of the Convention;   Whereas the Commission expresses the opinion that in this case there is no violation of the Convention;   Considering that the Committee of Ministers is called on to take a decision in circumstances which are not exactly those envisaged in Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention and that the Committee should act as closely as possible in accordance with the spirit of that Article;   Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the Convention;   Expressing its satisfaction with the measures taken to ensure in this case the full application of the Convention on Human Rights,   Decides that no further measures need be taken.