H.N. v. Czechoslovakia



AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 21028/92

by H.N.

against Czechoslovakia

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 10

December 1992, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

S. TRECHSEL

F. ERMACORA

G. SPERDUTI

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

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. J.-C. GEUS

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. MARXER

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 2 January 1992 by

H.N against Czechoslovakia and registered on 3 December 1992 under file

No. 21028/92;

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

of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

21028/92 - 2 -

The applicant, a citizen of the CSFR born in 1946, is employed

in a bookshop. She resides at Prague.

Insofar as it can be determined from the applicant's submissions,

the applicant's father emigrated to Switzerland in 1968 whereupon

property of the family in Czechoslovakia was expropriated by the State.

In 1991 the father, who presently still resides in Switzerland,

apparently transferred part of the property to the applicant as a

donation.

The applicant applied to various authorities for the restitution

of the property. On 25 October 1991 the Ministry of Finance informed

the applicant that her father could not donate property to her as the

property had not been restituted to him. On 26 February 1992 the

magistrature (Obecní úrad) of Prostejov refused the applicant's request

for restitution as the father was still alive.

The applicant's appeal was declared inadmissible by the

Constitutional Court (Ústavní soud) on 8 July 1992 with reference to

Section 23 para. 2 of the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (Zákon o

organizaci Ústavního soudu). According to this provision, the Court

may declare an appeal inadmissible inter alia if the applicant is not

qualified (neoprávneny subjekt) to file an appeal.

The applicant complains, without reference to any particular

provision of the Convention, that she cannot apply for restitution of

the property. The applicant also complains of her father's arrest and

detention prior to, and other circumstances surrounding, his

emigration.

The Commission has examined the applicant's separate complaints

as they have been submitted by her. However, after considering these

complaints as a whole, and insofar as these complaints are within its

competence, the Commission finds that they do not disclose any

appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the

Convention.

It follows that the application is manifestly ill-founded within

the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 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)