ÿWPC§ íÄd›SµyVâ GDr&bùf̽+rgä|ùæšE£Iû_jÆT ña{ºŒ¨)u¾G&%óIT›seÊTÀt.xzJY ¨ÉP@ÒV¸ óèØWÞRÄ×[„t°VÛ”‘îé„èßÑ°Z9WeúqŤ(­Ái Æ×S¥ŒËâ°YI`Ï‘ Êw=¤ÕaùÉ¿å{o LAþâJ6šx×Ìê…:6ÕœYënólÄ™øOê1h€-×½ÚÔ=<̘1R#O›t.íè˨ѿs±ôdEó±5£¨MÓ‰½É­A€”‹‹Ãþñ¿ãáÍ?aRÚ4v 9.ÈÛ¨¤mB¿nͬgD zZ«¡Gaõ7Kj”·'Ü© ’ÍcU¸õ=´E÷§OG’×:I-yƒüð•FÖ¨Áñ]ÊÌ\;”g‹ÖBäÊù¼ÖعM݃«"2Ó©¡K}ot¸ Û[åAÕ’±üÓ­ýÇ4:X¤ý+vvLõ†ì9ïBüaŽõS“æUûG%mŠf¬9õ¥*–&Ì&€ýè×OL÷íQ=¬›ât`×w8ÔƒqtØ*®NË!È5N*®‘D«×Huã/D\ÿc’Ôw¨0å1]}ñY U>ÀÌþ 0µÊ 0< 0Y» 0_ 0isÆÜ 0Ñ¢ 0(s D+› AMÆ %      0N) 0¶w #Á- UNî î M<(@Nh^ jwv4zŽ mô\  `‹&Times New Roman' Vladimir Kulomin v. Hungary, Communication No. 521/1992, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/50/D/521/1992 (14PR/C/50/D/521/1992 (1"Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   6F , ÿÿ4Heading 3Ô S ÔÓ p^SÓÔ€£££Ôò òÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€XXXÔó óÓ p^SÓ<ÿÿ:Default Para6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ  ÔóóÔ  Ô< ÿÿ:Normal (Web)Ô S ÔÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(©2cÇ$££Ý ƒf¸!ÝÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X¾VXXXÔÔ€X¾VXXX¾VÔÝ  Ý(ÿÿ$’’'dxd A<< cÿÿX#|x(ÍO$——ÔÿÔòòóóÔÿÔ(Žf¸$¡¡ÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X¾¦XXXÔÔ€X¾¦XXX¾¦Ô˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,ä,,,,,ä0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regularf’ø* Äpì*„º¤ ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒf¸!ÝÒÜ°ÒÒÜ°ÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X¾VXXXÔÔ€X¾VXXX¾VÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òHUMAN€RIGHTS€COMMITTEEÐ ° ÐÌòòÔ_ÔKulominÔ_Ô€v.€HungaryóóÐ |Ì ÐÌCommunication€No.€521/1992**Ð H˜ ÐÌ22€March€1996Ð  d ÐÌÔ_ÔCCPRÔ_Ô/C/50/D/521/1992*Ð à 0 ÐÌÌVIEWSó óÐ ’â  ÐÌÌòòòòSubmitted€byóó:€Vladimir€Ô_ÔKulominÔ_ÔÐ D”  ÐÌòòVictimóó:€The€authorÐ ` ÐÌòòState€partyóó:€HungaryÐ Ü, ÐÌòòDate€of€communicationóó:€6€May€1992€(initial€submission)€Ð ¨ø ÐÌòòDate€of€decision€on€admissibilityóó:€16€March€1994óóÐ tÄ ÐÌÌòòÓ  ÓThe€Human€Rights€Committeeóó,€established€under€article€28€of€the€International€CovenantÐ &v Ðon€Civil€and€Political€Rights,Ð  \ ÐÌòòMeetingóó€on€22€March€1996,Ð Ø( ÐÌòòHaving€concludedóó€its€consideration€of€communication€No.€521/1992€submitted€to€the€HumanÐ ¤ô ÐRights€Committee€by€Mr.€Vladimir€Ô_ÔKulominÔ_Ô€under€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€InternationalÐ Š Ú ÐCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,Ð p!À  ÐÌòòHaving€taken€into€accountóó€all€written€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€author€of€theÐ <#Œ" Ðcommunication€and€the€State€party,Ð "$r# ÐÌòòAdoptsóó€the€following:Ð î%>!% ÐÓWÓÌÌòòò òÓ  ÓViews€under€article€5,€paragraph€4,€of€the€Optional€Protocoló óóó€Ð  (ð#( ÐÓmÓÌÌÓ  Ó1.€The€author€of€the€communication€is€Vladimir€Ô_ÔKulominÔ_Ô,€a€Russian€citizen,€born€inÐ R+¢&+ ÐLeningrad€in€1954,€currently€detained€in€Budapest,€Hungary.€He€claims€to€be€a€victim€ofÐ 8,ˆ', Ðviolations€of€his€human€rights€by€Hungary.€The€Optional€Protocol€to€the€InternationalÐ -n(- ÐCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€entered€into€force€for€Hungary€on€7€December€1988.Ð ° ÐÌòòThe€facts€as€submitted€by€the€authoróó:Ð |Ì ÐÌ2.1€The€author€lived€in€Budapest,€Hungary,€and€was€a€Ô_ÔneighbourÔ_Ô€of€one€D.T.€and€the€latter'sÐ H˜ Ðgirlfriend,€K.G.€On€25€July€1988,€the€author€accompanied€D.T.€and€K.G.€to€her€father'sÐ . ~ Ðhouse;€K.G.€had€said€that€they€wanted€to€pick€up€some€documents€and€that€they€needed€theÐ  d Ðauthor's€protection€because€her€father€was€mentally€disturbed.€Upon€arrival,€K.G.'s€father,Ð ú J Ðwhen€stepping€outside€and€seeing€the€author,€D.T.€and€K.G.,€tried€to€hit€the€author.€WhenÐ à 0 Ðthe€author€pushed€him€away,€he€fell;€they€then€tied€him€up€because€K.G.€and€D.T.€claimedÐ Æ   Ðthat€he€was€dangerous€and€capable€of€anything.€After€K.G.€had€told€him€that€she€hadÐ ¬ ü  Ðtelephoned€the€psychiatric€hospital€and€that€they€would€pick€up€her€father,€the€author€left€theÐ ’â  Ðscene.Ð xÈ  ÐÌ2.2€On€8€August€1988,€while€he€was€in€Leningrad,€the€author€received€a€phone€call€fromÐ D”  ÐD.T.€and€K.G.€He€states€that€he€only€learned€at€that€moment€that€K.G.'s€father€had€died,€butÐ *z  Ðthat€they€did€not€tell€him€about€the€circumstances€of€his€death.Ð ` ÐÌ2.3€On€16€August€1988,€the€author€returned€to€Budapest€by€train.€Two€days€later,€he€wasÐ Ü, Ðarrested€at€the€Soviet„Hungarian€border€by€the€Hungarian€police,€charged€with€the€murderÐ Â Ðof€K.G.'s€father,€and€brought€to€Budapest.€The€author€complains€that€he€was€not€allowed€toÐ ¨ø Ðcall€his€lawyer,€or€the€Soviet€consul.€After€three€days€of€interrogation,€in€the€presence€of€anÐ ŽÞ Ðinterpreter,€he€was€given€a€form€to€sign.€The€police€allegedly€told€him€that€this€was€intendedÐ tÄ Ðfor€the€Soviet€consul;€however,€it€was€intended€for€an€extension€by€30€days€of€hisÐ Zª Ðprovisional€custody.Ð @ ÐÌ2.4€The€author€was€detained€at€the€police€station€for€five€months.€In€this€context€he€states:Ð  \ Ð"The€last€two€months€they€did€not€lead€me€to€interrogation€and€I€even€thought€everybody€hadÐ òB Ðforgotten€about€me.€It€was€terrible.€I€did€not€understand€one€word€of€Hungarian.€In€myÐ Ø( Ðbaggage€I€had€a€Hungarian€grammar€book€and€dictionaries€but€the€police€did€not€allow€meÐ ¾ Ðto€study€Hungarian.€Staying€in€the€police€station,€I€asked€for€my€lawyer€and€Russian€consulÐ ¤ô Ðevery€day€in€written€form,€but€without€result€(no€answer).€Moreover,€I€could€not€write€toÐ Š Ú Ðanywhere€for€five€months."€In€January€1989,€the€author€was€transferred€to€a€prison€whereÐ p!À  Ðhe€was€given€the€opportunity€to€study€Hungarian.Ð V"¦! ÐÌ2.5€As€to€his€legal€representation€and€the€preparation€of€his€Ô_ÔdefenceÔ_Ô,€the€author€states€that,Ð "$r# Ðprior€to€the€trial,€he€wrote€several€letters€to€the€Public€Prosecutor's€office.€In€August€1989,Ð %X $ Ðhe€was€allowed€during€six€days€to€examine€the€"protocol"€(depositions)€with€the€assistanceÐ î%>!% Ðof€an€interpreter€so€as€to€be€able€to€prepare€his€Ô_ÔdefenceÔ_Ô.€The€author€complains€that€his€lettersÐ Ô&$"& Ðwere€not€included€and€that€he€had€too€little€time€to€examine€the€file,€which€consisted€of€600Ð º' #' Ðpages.€He€submits€that,€after€examining€the€documents,€he€met€with€his€lawyer€for€the€firstÐ  (ð#( Ðtime.€He€complains€that€the€lawyer€was€old€and€incapable.€In€this€context€he€submits€that,Ð †)Ö$) Ðalthough€he€met€with€the€lawyer€five€times€prior€to€the€trial,€they€had€to€review€the€file€everyÐ l*¼%* Ðtime€from€the€start€and€that€after€the€twelfth€day€of€the€trial,€his€lawyer€asked€him€who€K.G.Ð R+¢&+ Ðactually€was.€Ð 8,ˆ', ÐÐ -n(- ÐÔ_Ô2.6€On€26€September€1989,€the€trial€began€in€the€Municipal€Court€of€Budapest.€The€authorÐ ° Ðwas€tried€together€with€K.G.€The€hearing€took€place€during€14€days,€spread€over€a€period€ofÐ –æ Ðfour€months.€The€author€reiterates€that€there€was€no€evidence€against€him.€Under€cross„Ð |Ì Ðexamination,€K.G.€changed€her€testimony€on€six€different€occasions;€according€to€the€author,Ð b² Ðher€allegations€against€him€thus€became€baseless.€Furthermore,€none€of€the€prosecutionÐ H˜ Ðwitnesses€incriminated€him.Ð . ~ ÐÌ2.7€The€author€further€submits€that€during€the€trial€the€judge€conceded€that€D.T.€togetherÐ ú J Ðwith€K.G.€had€planned€the€murder.€He€complains€that,€despite€this€finding,€no€effort€wasÐ à 0 Ðmade€to€find€D.T.,€nor€was€the€latter€sentenced€òòin€absentiaóó.€Furthermore,€the€author€allegesÐ Æ   Ðthat€when€he€complained€to€the€judge€she€replied€that€he€should€complain€about€such€mattersÐ ¬ ü  Ðin€Siberia€and€that€she€wanted€him€to€be€the€last€Russian€in€Hungary.€He€submits€that€theÐ ’â  Ðjudge's€discriminatory€remarks€were€deleted€from€the€trial€transcript,€but€that€they€areÐ xÈ  Ðrecorded€on€tape.€On€8€February€1990,€the€author€was€found€guilty€of€homicide€committedÐ ^®  Ðwith€cruelty€and€sentenced€to€10€years'€imprisonment,€the€minimum€sentence€established€byÐ D”  Ðlaw€for€this€offence,€with€subsequent€expulsion€from€Hungary.Ð *z  ÐÌ2.8€The€author€subsequently€appealed€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€Hungary,€on€the€followingÐ öF Ðgrounds:Ð Ü, ÐÌ(a)€The€trial€judge€ruled€that€the€author€had€admitted€his€guilt,€whereas€his€statements€to€theÐ ¨ø Ðpolice€and€depositions€made€at€the€preliminary€hearing€proved€otherwise;Ð ŽÞ ÐÌ(b)€The€judge€ruled€that€the€blood€found€on€the€victim€belonged€to€the€author,€whereas,Ð Zª Ðaccording€to€the€forensic€expert,€this€evidence€was€highly€questionable;Ð @ ÐÌ(c)€The€pathologist€testified€that€the€deceased€died€sometime€between€25€and€28€July€1988.Ð  \ ÐThe€judge€ruled€that€the€deceased€died€on€25€July€1988€(the€day€the€author€had€accompaniedÐ òB ÐD.T.€and€K.G.€to€the€deceased's€house),€thereby€implicating€the€author€in€the€crime.Ð Ø( ÐÌ2.9€On€30€October€1990,€the€Supreme€Court,€after€having€heard€the€appeal€of€both€theÐ ¤ô Ðprosecutor€and€the€defendants,€sentenced€the€author€to€another€four€years€of€imprisonment,Ð Š Ú Ðas€it€qualified€the€act€for€which€the€author€had€been€convicted€by€the€court€of€first€instanceÐ p!À  Ðas€an€offence€committed€with€the€objective€of€financial€gain.€The€author€points€out€that€heÐ V"¦! Ðhad€not€been€charged€with€robbery€or€theft€and€that€there€was€no€such€evidence€against€him.Ð <#Œ" ÐAccording€to€the€author,€the€Supreme€Court's€decision€is€further€proof€of€discriminationÐ "$r# Ðagainst€him.€He€further€alleges€that€the€Supreme€Court€did€not€take€his€lawyer's€submissionsÐ %X $ Ðinto€account€and€simply€ignored€the€many€contradictions€in€the€trial€transcript.Ð î%>!% ÐÌ2.10€The€author€subsequently€applied€to€the€President€of€the€Supreme€Court€for€review€ofÐ º' #' Ðhis€case.€On€12€December€1991,€the€Supreme€Court€dismissed€the€author's€application.€WithÐ  (ð#( Ðthis,€it€is€submitted,€all€domestic€remedies€have€been€exhausted.Ð †)Ö$) ÐÌòòThe€complaintóó:Ð R+¢&+ ÐÌ3.€Although€the€author€does€not€invoke€any€of€the€provisions€of€the€International€CovenantÐ -n(- Ðon€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€it€appears€from€his€submissions€that€he€claims€to€be€a€victimÐ ° Ðof€violations€by€Hungary€of€articles€9,€10,€14€and€26€of€the€Covenant.Ð –æ ÐÌòòState€party's€observations€on€admissibility€and€author's€commentsóó:Ð b² ÐÌ4.1€In€its€submission€of€25€March€1993,€the€State€party€points€out€that€the€Optional€ProtocolÐ . ~ Ðentered€into€force€for€Hungary€on€7€December€1988,€and€argues€that,€in€view€of€theÐ  d Ðprovisions€of€article€28€of€the€Vienna€Convention€on€the€Law€of€Treaties,€the€Committee€hasÐ ú J Ðno€competence€to€consider€individual€complaints€that€refer€to€events€that€occurred€prior€toÐ à 0 Ðthe€date€of€entry€into€force€of€the€Optional€Protocol€for€Hungary.€It€submits€that,Ð Æ   Ðaccordingly,€the€Committee€is€precluded€òòratione€temporisóó€from€considering€the€author'sÐ ¬ ü  Ðcomplaints€in€so€far€as€they€relate€to€his€arrest€and€the€first€few€months€of€his€detention.Ð ’â  ÐÌ4.2€The€State€party€further€argues€that€the€Committee€is€not€competent€to€consider€allegedÐ ^®  Ðviolations€of€rights€that€are€not€set€forth€in€the€Covenant.€It€submits€that€the€CovenantÐ D”  Ðcontains€no€provision€preventing€a€tribunal€of€first€instance€from€freely€considering€the€factsÐ *z  Ðthat€were€established€during€the€process€of€evaluation€of€the€evidence€drawing€reasonableÐ ` Ðconclusions€with€respect€to€the€guilt€of€the€accused€and€qualifying€the€act€from€theÐ öF Ðestablished€facts.€It€is€submitted€that,€accordingly,€the€Committee€cannot€consider€theÐ Ü, Ðauthor's€complaint€òòratione€materiaeóó.€Ð  ÐÌ4.3€The€State€party€further€submits€that,€similarly,€the€Committee€has€no€competence€toÐ ŽÞ Ðconsider€the€author's€complaint€that€D.T.,€a€Bulgarian€citizen,€was€not€prosecuted€orÐ tÄ Ðsentenced.€It€explains€that€D.T.€disappeared€during€the€proceedings€and€that€the€court€of€firstÐ Zª Ðinstance€issued€a€warrant€of€arrest€against€him.€The€State€party€further€explains€that€it€didÐ @ Ðnot€request€the€Bulgarian€authorities€to€extradite€D.T.€since,€under€the€Hungarian„BulgarianÐ &v ÐExtradition€Treaty,€extradition€is€not€possible€when€the€person€to€be€extradited€is€a€citizenÐ  \ Ðof€the€other€Signatory€Party.Ð òB ÐÌ4.4€The€State€party€concedes€that€the€author€has€exhausted€available€domestic€remedies€inÐ ¾ Ðhis€case.€It€submits€however€that€the€author€did€not€exhaust€domestic€remedies€in€respect€ofÐ ¤ô Ðhis€complaint€that€the€prison€authorities€obstructed€his€contacts€with€the€outside.€It€contendsÐ Š Ú Ðthat,€in€accordance€with€paragraph€36,€(f),€section€(1),€of€Decree€11€of€1979€on€the€executionÐ p!À  Ðof€penal€measures,€the€author€could€have€filed€a€complaint€to€the€competent€authorities€if€heÐ V"¦! Ðbelieved€that€he€had€been€obstructed€in€maintaining€contacts€with€other€persons.Ð <#Œ" ÐFurthermore,€pursuant€to€paragraph€22€of€Decree€8/1979€(VI.30)€of€the€Ministry€of€Justice,Ð "$r# Ðany€convict€may€submit€a€complaint€requesting€a€remedy€against€personal€injury.€TheÐ %X $ Ðcompetent€authorities€of€the€penitentiary€institution€are€obliged€to€examine€the€complaintÐ î%>!% Ðand€the€request.€If€the€convict€is€not€satisfied€with€the€measures€undertaken,€he€may€submitÐ Ô&$"& Ða€complaint€to€the€officer€in€charge€of€the€institution,€who€must€take€a€decision€within€15Ð º' #' Ðdays.€If€the€convict€is€not€satisfied€with€the€officer's€decision€either,€the€headquarters€of€theÐ  (ð#( ÐHungarian€penitentiary€administration€will€examine€the€complaint.€The€State€party€concludesÐ †)Ö$) Ðthat€the€author€has€not€availed€himself€of€his€right€to€submit€a€complaint,€and€therefore€hasÐ l*¼%* Ðnot€exhausted€domestic€remedies€in€this€respect.Ð R+¢&+ ÐÌ5.€In€his€reply€dated€5€May€1993,€the€author€challenges€the€State€party's€contention€that€partÐ -n(- Ðof€the€communication€is€inadmissible€òòratione€temporisóó.Ð ° ÐÌòòThe€Committee's€admissibility€decisionóó:Ð |Ì ÐÌ6.1€At€its€50th€session,€the€Committee€considered€the€admissibility€of€the€communication.Ð H˜ ÐÌ6.2€The€Committee€observed€that€the€Optional€Protocol€entered€into€force€for€Hungary€onÐ  d Ð7€December€1988.€It€recalled€that€the€Optional€Protocol€could€not€be€applied€retroactivelyÐ ú J Ðand€that€the€Committee€was€precluded€òòratione€temporisóó€from€examining€alleged€violationsÐ à 0 Ðof€the€Covenant€in€so€far€as€the€alleged€events€occurred€prior€to€the€date€of€entry€into€forceÐ Æ   Ðof€the€Optional€Protocol€for€the€State€party€concerned.€It€noted€that,€in€the€instant€case,€partÐ ¬ ü  Ðof€the€author's€pre„trial€detention,€as€well€as€his€trial,€occurred€after€7€December€1988,€andÐ ’â  Ðthat€it€was€not€precluded€from€considering€the€author's€claims€under€articles€9€and€10€in€soÐ xÈ  Ðfar€as€they€related€to€that€period€of€time.Ð ^®  ÐÌ6.3€With€respect€to€the€author's€complaint€that€one€of€the€suspects€in€the€case€had€not€beenÐ *z  Ðprosecuted€and€convicted,€the€Committee€observed€that€the€Covenant€did€not€provide€for€theÐ ` Ðright€to€see€another€person€criminally€prosecuted.€Accordingly,€it€found€that€this€part€of€theÐ öF Ðcommunication€was€inadmissible€as€incompatible€with€the€provisions€of€the€Covenant,Ð Ü, Ðpursuant€to€article€3€of€the€Optional€Protocol.Ð Â ÐÌ6.4€The€Committee€observed€that€the€author€claimed€that€he€did€not€have€a€fair€trial,€withinÐ ŽÞ Ðthe€meaning€of€article€14€of€the€Covenant.€In€this€context,€the€Committee€noted€that€theÐ tÄ Ðauthor€claimed€that€he€was€discriminated€against€because€of€his€nationality.€The€CommitteeÐ Zª Ðwas€of€the€opinion€that€these€issues€should€be€examined€on€the€merits.€Ð @ ÐÌ7.€Accordingly,€on€16€March€1994,€the€Human€Rights€Committee€decided€that€theÐ  \ Ðcommunication€was€admissible€inasmuch€as€it€appeared€to€raise€issues€under€articles€9,€10,Ð òB Ð14€and€26€of€the€Covenant.Ð Ø( ÐÌòòState€party's€submission€on€the€merits€and€author's€commentsóó:Ð ¤ô ÐÌ8.1€By€submission€of€27€December€1994,€the€State€party€notes€that€most€of€the€author'sÐ p!À  Ðclaims€concerning€his€detention€in€police€custody€relate€to€the€period€before€entry€into€forceÐ V"¦! Ðof€the€Optional€Protocol€for€Hungary€and€were€therefore€declared€inadmissible€by€theÐ <#Œ" ÐCommittee.€However,€the€State€party,€in€appreciation€of€the€Committee's€work,€also€submitsÐ "$r# Ðits€explanations€with€regard€to€the€merits€of€these€claims.Ð %X $ ÐÌ8.2€As€regards€the€author's€claims€under€article€9,€paragraphs€2€and€3,€the€State€party€submitsÐ Ô&$"& Ðthat€the€author€was€immediately€informed€of€the€reasons€of€his€arrest,€and€that€he€wasÐ º' #' Ðinformed€of€the€charges€against€him€on€20€August€1988.€He€was€interrogated€on€29€August,Ð  (ð#( Ð5,€14€and€20€September€1988.€On€22€August€1988,€he€was€ordered€to€be€kept€in€custody,€inÐ †)Ö$) Ðaccordance€with€Hungarian€law.€On€18€November€1988€he€was€informed€of€the€extensionÐ l*¼%* Ðof€his€remand€in€custody.€On€19€December€1988€he€was€confronted€with€his€co„accused,€andÐ R+¢&+ Ðon€5€and€6€January€1989€the€presentation€of€the€documents€took€place.€As€regards€theÐ 8,ˆ', Ðauthor's€complaint€that€he€"was€forgotten"€for€two€months,€the€State€party€points€out€that€theÐ -n(- Ðinvestigating€authority€after€20€September€1988€carried€out€several€other€investigations,Ð ° Ðordered€the€preparation€of€several€expert€opinions,€and€questioned€some€60€witnesses.€TheÐ –æ ÐState€party€concludes€that€its€investigating€authority€proceeded€actively€and€energeticallyÐ |Ì Ðtowards€solving€the€case€and€that€no€violation€of€article€9€has€taken€place.€In€this€context,Ð b² Ðthe€State€party€notes€that€the€author,€being€a€foreigner,€was€kept€in€custody€since,€had€heÐ H˜ Ðreturned€to€his€home€country,€he€could€not€have€been€extradited€under€the€Hungarian„SovietÐ . ~ Ðagreement.Ð  d ÐÌ8.3€As€regards€the€issues€under€article€10,€paragraphs€1€and€2(a),€the€State€party,€after€havingÐ à 0 Ðcarefully€examined€all€the€documents,€states€that€according€to€the€"service€note",€which€listsÐ Æ   Ðthe€contents€of€the€author's€luggage,€his€luggage€did€not€contain€books€of€any€kind.€Nor€doesÐ ¬ ü  Ða€request€for€a€grammar€book€or€dictionary€appear€on€any€so„called€request€sheets,€whichÐ ’â  Ðcontain€the€requests€of€those€in€custody.€In€this€connection,€the€State€party€notes€that€theÐ xÈ  Ðauthor€did€file€a€total€of€17€requests€sheets,€and€that€he€requested€"permission€for€reading"Ð ^®  Ðonly€on€9€November€1988,€after€which€it€was€granted.€As€regards€the€author's€claim€that€heÐ D”  Ðwas€not€allowed€to€write€letters€for€the€first€five€months€of€his€custody,€the€State€party€statesÐ *z  Ðthat€there€is€no€record€kept€of€the€detainees'€correspondence,€so€that€it€is€difficult€to€verifyÐ ` Ðthis€allegation.€The€State€party€notes,€however,€that€no€request€or€complaint€related€toÐ öF Ðcorrespondence€appears€on€the€requests€sheets€or€in€the€criminal€records,€and€concludes€thatÐ Ü, Ðit€is€improbable€that€the€author€was€denied€the€right€to€write€letters.€Finally,€the€State€partyÐ Â Ðsubmits€that€the€author€was€detained€throughout€as€a€prisoner€on€remand,€separated€fromÐ ¨ø Ðconvicted€prisoners,€while€awaiting€trial.€The€State€party€concludes€that€no€violation€ofÐ ŽÞ Ðarticle€10€occurred€in€the€author's€case.Ð tÄ ÐÌ8.4€As€regards€the€author's€claim€that€he€did€not€have€enough€time€for€the€preparation€of€hisÐ @ Ðdefence,€the€State€party€notes€that€a€lawyer€was€appointed€for€the€author€on€20€August€1988Ð &v Ðand€that€the€requests€sheets€show€that€the€author€asked€for€a€meeting€with€the€lawyer€on€30Ð  \ ÐSeptember€and€on€13€October€1988,€whereupon€the€lawyer€was€informed.€Also,€the€author'sÐ òB Ðrequests€of€23€August€and€30€September€1988€to€meet€the€Soviet€consul€were€forwarded€toÐ Ø( Ðthe€consulate.€Ð ¾ ÐÌ8.5€As€regards€the€author's€complaint€that€he€did€not€have€enough€time€to€study€theÐ Š Ú Ðdocuments€in€preparation€for€his€defence,€the€State€party€submits€that€the€six€days€that€wereÐ p!À  Ðavailable€to€the€author€cannot€be€considered€too€short,€and€that€he€could€have€applied€for€anÐ V"¦! Ðextension€of€the€period€either€personally€or€through€his€lawyer.€As€to€the€quality€of€theÐ <#Œ" Ðlawyer,€the€State€party€notes€that€there€is€no€indication€that€the€author€ever€complained€thatÐ "$r# Ðhis€lawyer€was€unsuitable€or€that€he€was€insufficiently€prepared.Ð %X $ ÐÌ8.6€As€regards€the€author's€claim€that€he€should€not€have€been€convicted€on€the€basis€of€theÐ Ô&$"& Ðevidence€against€him,€the€State€party€submits€that€this€is€a€matter€for€the€court€of€firstÐ º' #' Ðinstance€to€decide.Ð  (ð#( ÐÌ8.7€With€regard€to€the€author's€claims€that€he€is€a€victim€of€discrimination,€the€State€partyÐ l*¼%* Ðnotes€that€the€author€states€that€the€discriminatory€remarks€made€by€the€judge€were€recordedÐ R+¢&+ Ðon€the€audio€tape€of€the€hearing,€but€deleted€from€the€record.€The€State€party€refers€to€theÐ 8,ˆ', Ðrules€governing€the€record€of€serious€criminal€cases,€which€stipulate€that€the€judge€shallÐ -n(- Ðdictate€the€record€aloud€on€an€audio€tape€during€the€hearing€and€that€the€defendant€or€hisÐ ° Ðlawyer€have€a€right€at€any€time€to€make€comments€on€what€the€judge€has€dictated,€and€toÐ –æ Ðmove€that€something€other€than€that€which€the€judge€has€dictated€be€placed€on€the€record.Ð |Ì ÐEven€if€the€objection€by€the€defence€has€been€denied€by€the€judge,€the€judge's€ruling€isÐ b² Ðplaced€on€record.€The€record€dictated€on€the€audio€tape€is€then€transcribed€by€the€court€clerksÐ H˜ Ðand€at€that€point€again€objections€can€be€made€by€the€defence.€It€is€clear€from€the€record€thatÐ . ~ Ðneither€the€author€nor€his€lawyer€requested€the€inclusion€of€the€judge's€remarks€on€theÐ  d Ðrecord,€nor€made€any€proposal€or€comment€concerning€either€the€written€or€the€verbalÐ ú J Ðrecord.€The€State€party€concludes€therefore€that€there€is€no€indication€that€the€judge€indeedÐ à 0 Ðmade€the€remarks€attributed€to€her.€Furthermore,€the€State€party€points€out€that€at€any€stageÐ Æ   Ðof€the€proceedings,€an€objection€can€be€made€about€the€perceived€prejudice€of€a€judge€withÐ ¬ ü  Ðthe€president€of€the€Court.€No€such€objection€has€been€made€by€either€the€author€or€hisÐ ’â  Ðrepresentative.€In€the€light€of€the€above,€the€State€party€denies€that€the€author€has€been€theÐ xÈ  Ðvictim€of€discrimination€by€the€judge.Ð ^®  ÐÌ8.8€From€the€English€translation€of€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€First€Instance,€submittedÐ *z  Ðby€the€State€party,€it€appears€that€the€Court€found€that€the€victim€had€died€as€a€consequenceÐ ` Ðof€having€been€tied€up€too€tightly,€causing€paralysis€of€the€chest€muscles,€of€being€sedatedÐ öF Ðwith€ethyl€chloride€and€of€suffocation€because€of€plastic€bags€placed€over€his€head.€TheÐ Ü, ÐCourt€also€found€that€the€author€had€been€present€when€the€victim€was€sedated€with€the€ethylÐ Â Ðchloride€and€that€he€had€actively€participated€in€the€tying€up€of€the€victim,€and€consideredÐ ¨ø Ðthat€he€could€have€foreseen€that€the€victim€would€die€as€a€consequence€of€his€actions.Ð ŽÞ ÐÌ9.1€On€15€February€1995,€the€author€submitted€his€comments€on€the€State€party'sÐ Zª Ðsubmission.€He€submits€that€the€main€point€of€his€complaint€is€that,€as€a€consequence€of€theÐ @ Ðviolations€of€his€rights,€he€has€been€convicted€of€murder€whereas€he€is€innocent.Ð &v ÐÌ9.2€The€author€denies€ever€having€pleaded€guilty€to€the€murder.€He€further€states€that€it€isÐ òB Ðclear€from€the€State€party's€submission€that€he€was€interrogated€only€five€times€during€hisÐ Ø( Ðfive€months'€detention€in€the€police€station.Ð ¾ ÐÌ9.3€The€author€further€maintains€that€his€Hungarian€grammar€and€dictionary€were€in€theÐ Š Ú Ðluggage€he€brought€with€him€on€the€train€from€the€Soviet€Union€and€were€kept€in€the€depositÐ p!À  Ðin€the€police€station€during€his€detention€there.€As€regards€the€requests€sheets,€the€authorÐ V"¦! Ðstates€that€in€fact€he€could€not€ask€for€anything€without€the€cooperation€of€the€investigatingÐ <#Œ" Ðdetective.€He€further€states€that€none€of€the€detainees€were€allowed€to€have€pen€and€paperÐ "$r# Ðin€the€cell.€He€claims€that€he€verbally€requested€permission€to€write€letters,€through€theÐ %X $ Ðinterpreter.€The€author€further€states€that€he€knows€that€on€the€first€page€of€his€personal€fileÐ î%>!% Ðin€the€prison,€it€is€written€that€he€was€not€allowed€to€write€a€letter€to€anyone€until€1€JuneÐ Ô&$"& Ð1989,€by€order€of€the€public€prosecutor.Ð º' #' ÐÌ9.4€The€author€reiterates€that€no€lawyer€was€present€during€the€first€and€secondÐ †)Ö$) Ðinterrogations€at€the€police€station,€and€that€he€did€not€meet€his€lawyer€during€theÐ l*¼%* Ðinvestigations.€He€further€states€that€the€six€days€to€read€through€the€documents€was€tooÐ R+¢&+ Ðshort,€since€he€needed€the€assistance€of€an€interpreter,€which€costs€more€time.€He€alsoÐ 8,ˆ', Ðsubmits€that€he€had€not€enough€time€to€go€through€the€documents€with€his€lawyer.Ð -n(- Ї9.5€As€to€the€trial,€the€author€reiterates€his€allegation€that€the€judge€told€him€he€wished€himÐ ° Ðto€be€the€last€Russian€in€Hungary.€He€further€reiterates€that€there€was€no€proof€against€him.Ð –æ ÐÌ9.6€Finally,€the€author€states€that€the€judge€of€the€Supreme€Court€did€not€give€any€reasoningÐ b² Ðfor€sentencing€him€to€an€additional€four€years€of€imprisonment,€and€that€there€are€manyÐ H˜ Ðcontradictions€in€the€judgment.Ð . ~ ÐÌ9.7€The€author€concludes€that€the€State€party€is€trying€to€mislead€the€Committee€and€has€notÐ ú J Ðexamined€the€documents€carefully.Ð à 0 ÐÌòòFurther€submission€by€State€partyóó:Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌ10.1€By€note€verbale€of€4€December€1995,€the€State€party€was€requested€to€clarify€the€legalÐ xÈ  Ðprovisions€in€force€regarding€arrest€and€detention€at€the€time€of€Mr.€Kulomin's€arrest€andÐ ^®  Ðtheir€application€to€the€author.€By€submission€of€28€February€1996,€the€State€party€explainsÐ D”  Ðthat€in€1988€arrest€and€detention€were€regulated€by€section€91€of€the€Code€of€CriminalÐ *z  ÐProcedure,€under€which€persons€suspected€of€having€committed€a€serious€offence€could€beÐ ` Ðheld€in€detention€by€the€police€for€no€longer€than€72€hours.€After€72€hours,€detention€couldÐ öF Ðonly€be€extended€by€decision€either€of€the€public€prosecutor€or€the€court.€The€State€partyÐ Ü, Ðexplains€that,€before€committing€a€suspect€to€trial,€the€public€prosecutor€had€the€authorityÐ Â Ðto€renew€his€detention,€and€after€committal€to€trial,€this€authority€was€conferred€on€the€trialÐ ¨ø Ðcourt.€Pre„trial€detention€ordered€by€a€prosecutor€could€not€exceed€one€month,€but€wasÐ ŽÞ Ðsubject€to€extensions€by€order€of€superior€prosecutors.€If€after€one€year€of€pre„trial€detention,Ð tÄ Ða€person€was€not€yet€committed€to€trial,€further€detention€could€only€be€ordered€by€the€court.Ð Zª ÐÌ10.2€As€to€the€application€of€the€provisions€to€Mr.€Kulomin,€the€State€party€notes€that€theÐ &v Ðauthor€was€arrested€on€20€August€1988,€and€that€the€Office€of€the€Public€Prosecutor€inÐ  \ ÐBudapest€ordered€his€detention€on€2€August€1988,€that€is€within€the€72€hours€prescribed€byÐ òB Ðlaw.€This€detention€was€extended€by€various€public€prosecutors,€by€decisions€of€14Ð Ø( ÐSeptember€1988,€11€November€1988,€17€January€1989,€8€February€1989,€17€April€1989€andÐ ¾ Ð17€May€1989.€After€the€author's€committal€for€trial€in€May€1989,€the€court€extended€theÐ ¤ô Ðdetention€on€29€May€1989€until€the€final€court€judgment.€The€State€party€concludes€that€theÐ Š Ú Ðprocedure€followed€was€in€compliance€with€Hungarian€law,€as€required€by€article€9,Ð p!À  Ðparagraph€1,€of€the€Covenant€("no€one€shall€be€deprived€of€his€liberty€except€on€suchÐ V"¦! Ðgrounds€and€in€accordance€with€such€procedure€as€are€established€by€law").Ð <#Œ" ÐÌ10.3€The€State€party€refers€to€the€Committee's€admissibility€decision€in€which€the€CommitteeÐ %X $ Ðdecided€that€the€Committee€was€precluded€from€considering€alleged€violations€occurringÐ î%>!% Ðprior€to€the€date€of€entry€into€force€of€the€Optional€Protocol€for€the€State€party.€The€StateÐ Ô&$"& Ðparty€recalls€that€the€Optional€Protocol€entered€into€force€for€Hungary€on€7€December€1988,Ð º' #' Ðthat€is€after€the€author's€arrest€on€20€August€1988.€The€State€party€argues€that€the€obligationÐ  (ð#( Ðunder€article€9,€paragraph€3,€to€bring€the€author€promptly€before€a€judge€or€other€officerÐ †)Ö$) Ðauthorized€by€law€to€exercise€judicial€power€had€to€be€fulfilled€as€of€that€date.€WithÐ l*¼%* Ðreference€to€the€Committee's€jurisprudence€and€to€its€General€Comment,€the€State€partyÐ R+¢&+ Ðargues€that€it€is€clear€that€the€delay€must€not€exceed€a€few€days.€From€this€the€State€partyÐ 8,ˆ', Ðconcludes€that€the€applicability€of€article€9,€paragraph€3,€is€limited€in€time€and,€in€theÐ -n(- Ðauthor's€case,€ended€somewhere€in€August€1988.€According€to€the€State€party,€complianceÐ ° Ðor€non„compliance€with€the€obligation€under€article€9,€paragraph€3,€does€not€have€aÐ –æ Ðcontinuing€effect€and€the€State€party€concludes€that€the€question€whether€Mr.€Kulomin'sÐ |Ì Ðdetention€was€in€compliance€with€the€requirement€of€article€9,€paragraph€3,€is€inadmissibleÐ b² Ðòòratione€temporisóó.Ð H˜ ÐÌ10.4€As€regards€the€compatibility€of€the€procedure€with€the€requirements€of€article€9,Ð  d Ðparagraph€3,€the€State€party€interprets€the€term€"other€officers€authorized€by€law"€as€meaningÐ ú J Ðofficers€with€the€same€independence€towards€the€executive€as€the€Courts.€In€this€connection,Ð à 0 Ðthe€State€party€notes€that€the€law€in€force€in€Hungary€in€1988€provided€that€the€Chief€PublicÐ Æ   ÐProsecutor€was€elected€by€and€responsible€to€Parliament.€All€other€public€prosecutors€wereÐ ¬ ü  Ðsubordinate€to€the€Chief€Public€Prosecutor.€The€State€party€concludes€that€the€prosecutor'sÐ ’â  Ðorganization€at€the€time€had€no€link€whatsoever€with€the€executive€and€was€independentÐ xÈ  Ðfrom€it.€The€State€party€therefore€argues€that€the€prosecutors€who€decided€on€the€continuedÐ ^®  Ðdetention€of€Mr.€Kulomin€can€be€regarded€as€other€officers€authorized€by€law€to€exerciseÐ D”  Ðjudicial€power€within€the€meaning€of€article€9,€paragraph€3,€and€that€no€violation€of€theÐ *z  ÐCovenant€has€occurred.Ð ` ÐÌ10.5€Finally,€the€State€party€informs€the€Committee€that€the€provisions€referred€to€aboveÐ Ü, Ðwere€amended€by€Act€XXVI€of€1989,€which€entered€into€force€on€1€January€1990.€Under€theÐ Â Ðamended€law,€persons€arrested€on€criminal€charges€shall€be€brought€before€the€Court€withinÐ ¨ø Ð72€hours€and€the€court€decides€on€pre„trial€detention,€after€having€heard€the€prosecutor€andÐ ŽÞ Ðthe€defence.€The€Court's€orders€are€subject€to€appeal.Ð tÄ ÐÌòòExamination€of€the€meritsóó:Ð @ ÐÌ11.1€The€Human€Rights€Committee€has€considered€the€present€communication€in€the€lightÐ  \ Ðof€all€the€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€parties,€as€provided€in€article€5,€paragraphÐ òB Ð1,€of€the€Optional€Protocol.Ð Ø( ÐÌ11.2€The€Committee€has€taken€note€of€the€State€party's€argument€that€the€question€whetherÐ ¤ô Ðthe€author€was,€after€arrest,€promptly€brought€before€a€judge€or€other€officer€authorized€byÐ Š Ú Ðlaw€to€exercise€judicial€power,€is€inadmissible€òòratione€temporisóó.€The€Committee€observes,Ð p!À  Ðhowever,€that€article€9(3),€first€sentence,€is€intended€to€bring€the€detention€of€a€personÐ V"¦! Ðcharged€with€a€criminal€offense€under€judicial€control.€A€failure€to€do€so€at€the€beginningÐ <#Œ" Ðof€someone's€detention,€would€thus€lead€to€a€continuing€violation€of€article€9(3),€until€cured.Ð "$r# ÐThe€author's€pre„trial€detention€continued€until€he€was€brought€before€the€Court€in€MayÐ %X $ Ð1989.€The€Committee€is€therefore€not€precluded€òòratione€temporisóó€to€examine€the€questionÐ î%>!% Ðwhether€his€detention€was€in€accordance€with€article€9(3).Ð Ô&$"& ÐÌ11.3€The€Committee€notes€that,€after€his€arrest€on€20€August€1988,€the€author's€pre„trialÐ  (ð#( Ðdetention€was€ordered€and€subsequently€renewed€on€several€occasions€by€the€publicÐ †)Ö$) Ðprosecutor,€until€the€author€was€brought€before€a€judge€on€29€May€1989.€The€CommitteeÐ l*¼%* Ðconsiders€that€it€is€inherent€to€the€proper€exercise€of€judicial€power,€that€it€be€exercised€byÐ R+¢&+ Ðan€authority€which€is€independent,€objective€and€impartial€in€relation€to€the€issues€dealt€with.Ð 8,ˆ', ÐIn€the€circumstances€of€the€instant€case,€the€Committee€is€not€satisfied€that€the€publicÐ -n(- Ðprosecutor€could€be€regarded€as€having€the€institutional€objectivity€and€impartialityÐ ° Ðnecessary€to€be€considered€an€"officer€authorized€to€exercise€judicial€power"€within€theÐ –æ Ðmeaning€of€article€9(3).Ð |Ì ÐÌ11.4€The€author€has€further€claimed€that€he€was€not€allowed€to€study€Hungarian€while€inÐ H˜ Ðpolice€custody€and€that€he€was€not€allowed€to€correspond€with€his€family€and€friends.€TheÐ . ~ ÐState€party€has€denied€the€allegations,€stating€that€the€author€requested€permission€forÐ  d Ðreading€on€9€November€1988,€which€request€was€granted,€and€that€there€is€no€trace€of€aÐ ú J Ðrequest€concerning€correspondence,€but€that€no€records€of€the€inmates'€correspondence€areÐ à 0 Ðkept.€In€the€circumstances,€the€Committee€finds€that€the€facts€before€it€do€not€sustain€aÐ Æ   Ðfinding€that€the€author€was€a€victim€of€a€violation€of€article€10€of€the€Covenant.Ð ¬ ü  ÐÌ11.5€As€regards€the€author's€claim€under€article€14€of€the€Covenant,€the€Committee€notes€thatÐ xÈ  Ða€lawyer€was€appointed€for€the€author€on€20€August€1988,€that€the€author€requested€to€meetÐ ^®  Ðhis€lawyer,€that€the€State€party€submits€that€it€did€forward€the€author's€requests€to€the€lawyer,Ð D”  Ðand€that€the€author€states€that€he€did€not€meet€his€lawyer.€The€Committee€further€notes€thatÐ *z  Ðit€is€unclear€when€the€author€met€his€lawyer€for€the€first€time,€but€that€it€appears€from€the€fileÐ ` Ðthat€the€author€had€several€meetings€with€his€lawyer€before€the€beginning€of€the€trial€againstÐ öF Ðhim.€Further,€the€Committee€notes€that€the€author€was€given€opportunity€to€study€the€caseÐ Ü, Ðfile€in€preparation€for€his€defence€with€the€assistance€of€an€interpreter€and€that€there€is€noÐ Â Ðindication€that€he€ever€complained€to€the€Hungarian€authorities€about€this€being€insufficient.Ð ¨ø ÐAs€to€his€representation€at€the€trial,€the€author€has€not€made€any€specific€complaint€about€anyÐ ŽÞ Ðparticular€failure€of€his€lawyer€in€the€conduct€of€his€defence,€nor€does€it€appear€from€the€fileÐ tÄ Ðthat€the€lawyer€did€not€represent€the€author€properly.€In€the€circumstances,€the€CommitteeÐ Zª Ðfinds€that€the€facts€before€it€do€not€show€that€the€author€was€denied€adequate€time€andÐ @ Ðfacilities€to€prepare€his€defence,€nor€does€the€information€before€the€Committee€permit€toÐ &v Ðconclude€that€the€author's€lawyer€did€not€provide€effective€representation€in€the€interests€ofÐ  \ Ðjustice.Ð òB ÐÌ11.6€The€author€further€has€claimed€that€the€judge€at€the€trial€of€first€instance€was€biasedÐ ¾ Ðagainst€him€and,€more€specifically,€that€she€discriminated€against€him€because€of€hisÐ ¤ô Ðnationality.€The€Committee€notes€that€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€First€Instance€shows€noÐ Š Ú Ðtrace€of€bias€on€the€part€of€the€judge€and,€moreover,€that€the€author€or€his€representativeÐ p!À  Ðmade€no€objection€during€the€trial€to€the€judge's€attitude.€In€the€circumstances,€theÐ V"¦! ÐCommittee€finds€that€there€is€no€substantiation€for€the€author's€claim€that€he€wasÐ <#Œ" Ðdiscriminated€against€on€the€basis€of€his€nationality.Ð "$r# ÐÔ_ÔÌ11.7€As€regards€the€appeal,€the€author€has€claimed€that€the€Supreme€Court€increased€hisÐ î%>!% Ðsentence€for€having€acted€with€the€objective€of€financial€gain,€whereas€he€had€never€beenÐ Ô&$"& Ðcharged€with€robbery€or€theft.€The€Committee€notes,€however,€that€it€appears€from€the€courtÐ º' #' Ðdocuments€that€the€author€was€in€fact€charged€with€murder,€committed€with€cruelty€òòandóó€outÐ  (ð#( Ðof€financial€gain.€Although€the€Court€of€First€Instance€found€him€guilty€only€of€murderÐ †)Ö$) Ðcommitted€with€cruelty,€the€Supreme€Court€quashed€the€judgment€and€found€the€authorÐ l*¼%* Ðguilty€of€murder€committed€with€cruelty€òòandóó€out€of€financial€gain.€The€Committee€furtherÐ R+¢&+ Ðnotes€that€the€conviction€and€sentence€imposed€by€the€Supreme€Court€upon€the€author,€wasÐ 8,ˆ', Ðreviewed€by€the€President€of€the€Supreme€Court.€The€Committee€finds€therefore€that€theÐ -n(- Ðfacts€before€it€do€not€show€a€violation€of€the€Covenant€with€regard€to€the€author's€appeal.Ð ° ÐÌ11.8€The€Committee€takes€this€opportunity€to€reiterate€that€it€is€not€for€the€Committee,€butÐ |Ì Ðfor€the€courts€of€the€States€parties€concerned,€to€evaluate€facts€and€evidence€in€a€criminalÐ b² Ðcase,€and€that€the€Committee€cannot€assess€a€person's€guilt€or€innocence.€This€is€so,€unlessÐ H˜ Ðit€is€manifest€from€the€information€before€the€Committee€that€the€Courts'€decisions€wereÐ . ~ Ðarbitrary€or€amounted€to€a€denial€of€justice.€In€the€present€case,€nothing€in€the€writtenÐ  d Ðsubmissions€before€the€Committee€permits€such€a€conclusion.Ð ú J ÐÌ12.€The€Human€Rights€Committee,€acting€under€article€5,€paragraph€4,€of€the€OptionalÐ Æ   ÐProtocol€to€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€is€of€the€view€that€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðfacts€before€it€disclose€a€violation€of€article€9,€paragraph€3,€of€the€International€Covenant€onÐ ’â  ÐCivil€and€Political€Rights.Ð xÈ  ÐÌ13.€Under€article€2,€paragraph€3(a),€of€the€Covenant,€Mr.€Ô_ÔKulominÔ_Ô€is€entitled€to€anÐ D”  Ðappropriate€remedy.€The€State€party€is€under€an€obligation€to€ensure€that€similar€violationsÐ *z  Ðdo€not€occur€in€the€future.Ð ` ÐÌ14.€Bearing€in€mind€that,€by€becoming€a€State€party€to€the€Optional€Protocol,€the€State€partyÐ Ü, Ðhas€recognized€the€competence€of€the€Committee€to€determine€whether€there€has€been€aÐ Â Ðviolation€of€the€Covenant€or€not€and€that,€pursuant€to€article€2€of€the€Covenant,€the€StateÐ ¨ø Ðparty€has€undertaken€to€ensure€to€all€individuals€within€its€territory€and€subject€to€itsÐ ŽÞ Ðjurisdiction€the€rights€recognized€in€the€Covenant€and€to€provide€an€effective€andÐ tÄ Ðenforceable€remedy€in€case€a€violation€has€been€established,€the€Committee€wishes€toÐ Zª Ðreceive€from€the€State€party,€within€90€days,€information€about€the€measures€taken€to€giveÐ @ Ðeffect€to€the€Committee's€Views.Ð &v ÐÌ[Adopted€in€English,€French€and€Spanish,€the€English€text€being€the€original€version.Ð òB ÐSubsequently€to€be€issued€also€in€Arabic,€Chinese€and€Russian€as€part€of€the€Committee'sÐ Ø( Ðannual€report€to€the€General€Assembly.]Ð ¾ ÐÌÌòòFootnotesóóÐ p!À  ÐÌòò*óó/€€Made€public€by€decision€of€the€Human€Rights€Committee.Ð <#Œ" ÐÌòò*óó/€€Pursuant€to€rule€85€of€the€rules€of€procedure,€Committee€member€Ô_ÔTamsÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔBnÔ_Ô€did€not€takeÐ %X $ Ðpart€in€the€adoption€of€the€Views.Ð î%>!% ÐÌòò**óó/€€The€text€of€an€individual€opinion€by€Committee€member€Ô_ÔNisukeÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAndoÔ_Ô€is€appended€toÐ º' #' Ðthe€present€document.Ð  (ð#( ÐÓãÓÌÌÓ  Óòòò òAppendixó óóóÐ R+¢&+ ÐÓ §ÓÌÐ -n(- ÐòòÓ  ÓIndividual€opinion€by€Committee€member€Ô_ÔNisukeÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAndoÔ_Ôóó€Ð ° ÐÌI€do€not€consider€that€the€Committee's€finding€of€a€violation€of€article€9,€paragraph€3,€in€theÐ |Ì Ðinstant€case€(see€paragraph€12)€is€sufficiently€persuasive.€The€reason€behind€that€finding€isÐ b² Ðreflected€in€paragraph€11.3:€in€the€circumstances€of€the€instant€case,€the€Committee€is€notÐ H˜ Ðsatisfied€that€the€Public€Prosecutor€could€be€regarded€as€an€"officer€authorized€to€exerciseÐ . ~ Ðjudicial€power"€within€the€meaning€of€article€9,€paragraph€3.Ð  d ÐÌArticle€9,€paragraph€3,€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights€stipulates:Ð à 0 Ðanyone€arrested€or€detained€on€a€criminal€charge€shall€be€brought€promptly€before€a€judgeÐ Æ   Ðor€other€officer€authorized€by€law€to€exercise€judicial€power€and€shall€be€entitled€to€trialÐ ¬ ü  Ðwithin€a€reasonable€time€or€to€release.€The€State€party€interprets€the€term€"other€officerÐ ’â  Ðauthorized€by€law"€as€meaning€an€officer€with€the€same€independence€towards€the€executiveÐ xÈ  Ðas€a€court.€It€also€notes€that€the€law€in€force€in€Hungary€in€1988€provided€that€the€ChiefÐ ^®  ÐPublic€Prosecutor€was€elected€by€and€responsible€to€Parliament€and€that€all€other€publicÐ D”  Ðprosecutors€were€subordinate€to€the€Public€Prosecutor€(paragraph€10.4).Ð *z  ÐÌAs€a€matter€of€fact,€in€the€domestic€law€of€many€States€parties,€public€prosecutors€areÐ öF Ðgranted€certain€judicial€power,€including€the€power€to€investigate€and€prosecute€suspects€inÐ Ü, Ðcriminal€cases.€In€the€case€of€Hungarian€law€in€1988,€this€power€included€the€power€toÐ Â Ðextend€the€detention€of€suspects€up€to€one€year€before€they€were€committed€to€trialÐ ¨ø Ð(paragraph€10.1).Ð ŽÞ ÐÌIn€my€opinion,€the€pre„trial€detention€of€suspects€for€the€period€of€one€year€seems€to€be€tooÐ Zª Ðlong.€In€addition,€while€I€do€understand€that€under€the€Hungarian€law€of€1988€the€PublicÐ @ ÐProsecutor€who€should€decide€on€the€extension€of€detention€was€to€be€different€from€the€oneÐ &v Ðwho€requested€the€extension,€excessive€detention€was€likely€to€occur€in€that€type€of€system.Ð  \ ÐÌNevertheless,€I€am€unable€to€accept€the€categorical€statement€of€the€Committee,€as€quotedÐ Ø( Ðabove,€to€the€effect€that€in€the€Hungarian€type€of€system€the€Public€Prosecutor€necessarilyÐ ¾ Ðlacks€the€institutional€objectivity€and€impartiality€necessary€to€be€considered€as€an€"officerÐ ¤ô Ðauthorized€to€exercise€judicial€power"€within€the€meaning€of€article€9,€paragraph€3.€Even€inÐ Š Ú Ðthat€type€of€system,€a€prosecutor's€decision€on€the€extension€of€the€detention€of€a€particularÐ p!À  Ðsuspect€in€a€given€case€may€well€be€impartial€and€objectively€justifiable.€To€deny€suchÐ V"¦! Ðimpartiality€and€objectivity,€the€Committee€needs€to€clarify€the€detailed€circumstances€of€theÐ <#Œ" Ðinstant€case€on€which€it€bases€its€finding,€but€such€clarification€is€totally€lacking€in€theÐ "$r# ÐCommittee's€Views.Ð %X $ ÐÌN.€Ô_ÔAndoÔ_ÔÐ Ô&$"& ÐÌ[signed]Ð  (ð#( ÐÌ[Done€in€English,€French€and€Spanish,€the€English€text€being€the€original€version.Ð l*¼%* ÐSubsequently€to€be€issued€also€in€Arabic,€Chinese€and€Russian€as€part€of€the€Committee'sÐ R+¢&+ Ðannual€report€to€the€General€Assembly.]Ð 8,ˆ', ÐÓk§Ó