Gampel v. Austria



AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 15221/89

by Jozsef GAMPEL

against Austria

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private

on 7 November 1990, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

J.A. FROWEIN

S. TRECHSEL

F. ERMACORA

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G. H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ RUIZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

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 7 July 1989 by

Jozsef GAMPEL against Austria and registered on 20 July 1989 under

file No. 15221/89;

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

Rules of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

The applicant is a Hungarian citizen born in 1934.

The applicant was ordered to leave Austria on 12 October 1983

as he had no residence papers, the order to be effective only from

30 April 1984. The suspensive effect was extended. Subsequent

requests for residence papers and asylum have all been rejected. A

decision of the Constitutional Court (Verfassungsgerichtshof) of 1

June 1988 rejected procedural complaints of the applicant. A further

decision of the Constitutional Court, of 17 April 1989, rejected an

appeal by the applicant against a decision of the Ministry of the

Interior of 14 December 1988, because he had not supplied the

requisite copies.

The applicant complains that he was refused a residence

and work permit. He also makes procedural complaints concerning the

various proceedings that he has been involved in. He alleges

violations of Articles 5, 6 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of

Protocol No. 1 and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4.

The Commission has examined the applicant's separate

complaints as they have been submitted by him. However, after

considering the case as a whole, the Commission finds that it does not

disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set

out in the Convention.

It follows that the application is inadmissible within the

meaning of Article 27 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission unanimously

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)