Zeidler, Strauss and Puhm v. Austria



Application Nos. 17755/91, 17756/91 and

17757/91

by Franz ZEIDLER, Josef STRAUSS and

Rosa PUHM

against Austria

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

7 December 1994, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

S. TRECHSEL

A. WEITZEL

F. ERMACORA

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

MM. F. MARTINEZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. MARXER

G.B. REFFI

M.A. NOWICKI

I. CABRAL BARRETO

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

J. MUCHA

E. KONSTANTINOV

D. SVÁBY

G. RESS

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection

of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 20 November 1990,

6 November 1990 and 6 November 1990 respectively by Franz ZEIDLER,

Josef STRAUSS and Rosa PUHM against Austria and registered on

5 February 1991 under Application Nos. 17755/91, 17756/91 and 17757/91;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules

of Procedure of the Commission;

Having regard to :

- the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of

the Commission;

- the Commission's decision of 2 September 1991 that the

applications be joined and communicated to the respondent

Government, without requesting observations, pending the outcome

of Application No. 15220/89, Schneider v. Austria

- the informtion submitted by the respondent Government on

26 August 1994 and the information provided in reply submitted

by the applicants on 18 October 1994;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicants are Austrian citizens, born in 1932, 1948 and 1909

respectively. They all live in Vienna and are represented before the

Commission by MM. Prader and Goeritz, lawyers practising in Vienna.

By letter of 14 August 1990, received on 20 August 1990, the

first applicant was informed by the Austrian Ministry for the Interior

(Bundesministerium für Inneres), in reply to his inquiry of 11 June

1990, that since 1951 the State police (Staatspolizei) had kept a

record of his activities which were of interest to them. It is stated

in the letter that, inter alia, in 1951 the applicant participated in

a world youth meeting in Berlin, that he was an active member of the

Free Austrian Youth Organisation (FÖJ), that in 1974 he married a

Hungarian, and that in 1987 he was a candidate for the Austrian

Communist Party (KPÖ) in municipal elections.

The second applicant states that, according to information given

by the Austrian Ministry for the Interior in a letter dated 12 April

1990, received on 7 May 1990, the State police had kept him under

secret surveillance for more than 20 years and had kept a record of his

politically oriented activities since 1959.

By letter of 28 April 1990, received on 16 May 1990, the third

applicant was informed by the Austrian Ministry for the Interior, in

reply to her inquiry of 3 March 1990, that since 1980 the State police

had kept a record of her politically oriented activities, going back

to 1933.

The applicants originally complained to the Commission that the

secret surveillance violated their rights under Articles 8 and 13 of

the Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

On 2 September 1991 the Commission decided to communicate the

three applications to the respondent Government without, however,

requesting written observations on admissibility and merits, pending

the outcome of a similar application which had been communicated

previously, namely Application No. 15220/89, Schneider v. Austria. A

friendly settlement was reached in the latter case (Comm. Report

15.10.94). Subsequently, the parties to the present applications also

reached an agreement, the text of which was submitted by the respondent

Government on 26 August 1994. According to that agreement, which was

signed by the applicants, each of them receives a lump sum payment as

follows: AS 90,000 (Zeidler), AS 80,000 (Strauss) and AS 80,000 (Puhm).

The applicants in turn undertook to withdraw their applications after

receipt of the payment in question.

By letter of 18 October 1994 the applicants' lawyers informed the

Commission that their clients wished to withdraw their cases.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the parties have reached a financial

agreement and that, as a result, the applicants wish to withdraw their

cases.

The Commission finds that the applicants no longer intend to

pursue their petitions, within the meaning of Article 30 para. 1 (a)

of the Convention, and that there are no reasons of a general character

affecting respect for Human Rights, as defined in the Convention,

necessitating an examination of the cases ex officio pursuant to

Article 30 para. 1 in fine.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATIONS OUT OF ITS LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)