CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 23 octobre 1981

.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, under the terms of Article 32 (art. 32) of the 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 in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the convention relating to the application lodged by Mr Edgardo Bonazzi against Italy (No. 7975/77);   Whereas on 27 April 1981 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights, in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the convention;   Whereas in his application introduced on 8 July 1977, the applicant complained that his detention following a warrant of arrest issued by the Assize Court of Appeal of Ancona on 15 June 1976 was not lawful under Italian law and that this constituted a violation of Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), of the convention and that no court decided on his appeal against the above-mentioned warrant of arrest contrary to Article 5, paragraph 4 (art. 5-4), of the convention;   Whereas the Commission, having declared the application admissible on 13 December 1978 had expressed in its report unanimously the opinion that there was no breach of Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), of the convention and equally unanimously that there was no breach of Article 5, paragraph 4 (art. 5-4), of the convention;   Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the convention;   Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the convention,   Decides that in this case there was no violation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.