CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 24 juillet 2000

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s7F95B77E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:11pt } .s780D430E { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:11pt } .s47E2B0C6 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     Resolution DH (2000) 104 Human Rights Application No. 28286/95 W.O. against Switzerland   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 24 July 2000 at the 716th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article   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 on 3 June 1999 by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 18   August   1995 by a Swiss national, Mr   W.O., against Switzerland; Whereas on 29 June 1999 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, of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article   48 of the Convention; Whereas in his application, declared admissible by the Commission on 16 April 1998, the applicant complained of the excessive length of certain criminal proceedings; Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article   6, paragraph 1, of the Convention; Whereas during the examination of the case, the Committee of Ministers was informed, on 22   March   2000, of a development that might produce a solution to the present case, under the terms of which the petition for pardon lodged by the applicant had partially been granted so that the unserved part of his sentence of 24 months’ imprisonment, delivered on 3 May 1994 by the Cantonal Court of Schwyz, had been substituted by the Justice Department of the Schwyz Canton by a fine of 20   000   Swiss francs, which the applicant had paid within the time-limit set; Whereas, according to Mr W.O.’s view, the application had lapsed, Finds that the solution reached is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention; Decides therefore, under Rule 6 bis of the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers for the application of Article 32 of the Convention, to discontinue its examination of the present case; Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case.