CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 13 décembre 1990

.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 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Weber case delivered on 22 May 1990 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling that the case originated in an application against Switzerland lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 15 May 1984 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by Mr Franz Weber, a Swiss national, who complained of judicial proceedings conducted without a hearing and resulting in his conviction for having breached, at a press conference, the confidentiality of an investigation;   Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 12 April 1989 and by the Government of Switzerland on 3 July 1989;   Whereas in its judgment of 22 May 1989 the Court:   - held by six votes to one that Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the   Convention applied in the instant case and that there had been   a breach of it;   - held unanimously that there had been a breach of Article 10 (art. 10);   - held unanimously that the respondent state was to pay the   applicant for costs and expenses, the sum of 8 482,50 Swiss   francs;   - dismissed unanimously the remainder of the claim for just   satisfaction;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention;   Having invited the Government of Switzerland to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 22 May 1990, having regard to its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;   Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of Switzerland gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;   Having satisfied itself that the Government of Switzerland has paid the applicant the sum provided for in the judgment,   Declares, having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Switzerland, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.   Appendix to Resolution DH (90) 39   Information provided by the Government of Switzerland during the examination of the Weber case by the Committee of Ministers   The Canton of Vaud Code of Criminal Procedure of 12 September 1967 has been amended by an Act of 12 December 1989, which came into force on 1 July 1990.   Under Sections 184, 185 and 186 of the Act, the parties, their relatives and acquaintances, their counsel and assistants, their consultants and the latter's employees, as well as experts and witnesses are bound to maintain the confidentiality of an investigation, including matters revealed by the investigation itself and unpublished investigation decisions and measures, on pain of a fine of a maximum of 5 000 Swiss francs.   According to Section 186, paragraph 3, the punishment provided for shall henceforth be ordered after a summary investigation by the investigating judge and not by the President of the Court of Cassation acting of his own motion or on an information.   The summary investigation by the investigating judge is conducted in accordance with Sections 254 et seq. of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 12 September 1967. Under Section 264, if the judge considers that he has sufficient information and that the case comes within his jurisdiction, he shall give a decision regarding the sentence.   Under Section 265, as amended by the Act of 12 December 1989, if the person charged states, within the time-limit provided for in Section 188, that he refuses to accept to be sentenced, the judge must refer the case to the police court.   In that event, the provisions of the first chapter of Title III of the Code of Criminal Procedure concerning the hearing and the judgment will apply and the accused, whose case has thus been referred to the police court, will have the benefit of adversarial proceedings at a public hearing.   The sum awarded by the Court was paid on 25 June 1990.