skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 64774 Find in a Library
Title: DECISION OF THE COMMISSION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS - JULY 1978
Author(s): ANON
Corporate Author: Oeffentlichkeitsarbeit
Bundesminister Fuer Justiz
Referat Fuer Presse- und
West Germany (Former)
Date Published: 1978
Page Count: 34
Format: Document
Language: German
Country: West Germany (Former)
Annotation: THE WEST GERMAN SECRETARY OF JUSTICE PUBLISHES THE DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNING THE GRIEVANCES OF THREE MEMBERS OF THE BAADER-MEINHOF GANG.
Abstract: IN JULY 1976, GUDRUN ENSSLIN, ANDREAS BAADER, AND JAN RASPE LODGED AN OFFICIAL COMPLAINT WITH THE COMMISSION ALLEGING THAT THEIR UNJUSTIFIED AND HARSH DETENTION CONDITIONS (1) VIOLATED ARTICLE 3 OF THE EUROPEAN HUMAN RIGHTS CONVENTIONS AND (2) HAD AFFLICTED CONSIDERABLE PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY ON THEM. THEY ALSO PROTESTED THE LIMITATION ON THE NUMBER OF DEFENSE ATTORNEYS OF THEIR CHOICE, THE EXCLUSION OF THEIR DEFENSE ATTORNEYS FROM THE TRIAL, AND THE CONTACT BAN (IN CONNECTION WITH THE MARTIN SCHLEYER KIDNAPPING). DESPITE THE DEATH OF THE THREE INMATES IN OCTOBER 1977, WHICH WAS OFFICIALLY DECLARED SUICIDE, THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS MADE A FINAL DECISION ON THE CASE IN STRASBURG ON JULY 8, 1978, REJECTING ALL COMPLAINTS AS UNFOUNDED. IN A DETAILED STATEMENT OF REASONS, THE COMMISSION ARGUED THAT THE UNUSUAL DETENTION CONDITIONS, INCLUDING THE ISOLATION FROM OTHER NONTERRORIST PRISONERS, WERE JUSTIFIED BY SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. THE 'REMOVAL OF ASSOCIATION' UNDER SUCH CONDITIONS IS ALSO PRACTICED BY OTHER MEMBER COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION. EXPERT WITNESSES COULD NOT DEFINITELY ATTRIBUTE ANY HEALTH DAMAGES THE PRISONERS HAD SUFFERED TO PRISON CONDITIONS IN VIEW OF THE LONG DURATION OF THE DETENTION AND THE INMATES' REPEATED HUNGER STRIKES. CONCERNING THE LIMITATIONS OF THE DEFENSE, THE COMMISSION RULED THAT, ALTHOUGH AN ACCUSED HAS THE RIGHT TO THE COUNSEL OF HIS CHOICE, THE NUMBER OF ATTORNEYS CAN BE LIMITED BY LAW. THE EXCLUSION OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS FROM THE TRIAL WAS JUSTIFIED SINCE THEY WERE SUSPECTED OF INVOLVEMENT IN CRIMINAL ACTIONS (SUPPORT OF A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY) THEMSELVES. --IN GERMAN. (SAJ)
Index Term(s): Baader-Meinhof Gang; Fair trial-free press; Germany; Inmate grievances; International organizations; Terrorist detention
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=64774

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.