CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 15 décembre 1995

.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 on 16 January 1992 by Mr Komulainen against Finland (Application No. 19576/92);        Whereas on 10 July 1995 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, as declared admissible by the Commission on 10 October 1994, the applicant complained of the requirement that, chosen by a certain political party, he should have been a member of that party in order to be eligible for a municipal position of trust;        Whereas in its report adopted on 16 May 1995, the Commission expressed, by twenty-seven votes to one, the opinion that there had been no violation of Article 11 (art. 11) of the Convention and expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been no violation of Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 11 (art. 14+11);        Whereas, at the 553rd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies held on 15 December 1995, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the Convention, that there had been in this case no violation of Article 11 (art. 11) of the Convention and that there had been in this case no violation of Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 11 (art. 14+11),        Declares that it has exercised its functions under Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention in this case;        Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case.