[align=left]
All deprivations of civil and political rights incurred under
paragraphs 1 or 2 of Article 1 of the Legislative Decree of
19th September 1945 (Civic Black Lists Act), or by inscription on the
lists of the Military Prosecutor (auditeur militaire) in virtue of the
said Legislative Decree or of the Act of 14th June 1948, or in virtue
of Article 7 of the said Legislative Decree or of Article 7,
paragraph 1 of the said Act, are hereby terminated.

Paragraph 2

...

Paragraph 3

...

Paragraph 4

...

Paragraph 5

Persons sentenced to deprivation of liberty for a period of more than
twenty years may apply to the Court for total or partial restitution
of the rights enumerated in sub-paragraphs 6 and 9 of paragraph 1 of
Article 123 ***ies of the Penal Code.

The admissibility of such applications shall be subject to the
conditions laid down in Article 123 septies of the Penal Code and the
procedure shall be that defined in paragraph 2 of the said Article.

Paragraph 6

For the purposes of the present interim measures, heavier sentences
shall be assimilated to the penalties referred to above, if they have
been reduced to the equivalent of the latter by act of clemency.

Paragraph 7

Deprivations of rights under Article 123 ***ies (e), (f) and (g) of
the Penal Code, as worded before the present Act came into force, shall
be maintained only insofar as the participation envisaged therein is of a
political character; the deprivation mentioned under (h) shall no
longer be applicable.

Paragraph 8

The provisions made under the preceding paragraphs shall quash all
future effect of these deprivations but shall not restore to those
concerned any title, rank, office, employment or public position of
which they have been stripped; nor shall they restore to such persons
the status of avocat, avocat stagiaire or avocat honoraire (barrister,
probationary barrister or honorary counsel) if they have been deprived
of such status."

20. At the public hearing on 3rd July 1961, the Agent of the Belgian
Government maintained that, in its earlier form, Article 123 ***ies
was fully justified and that De Becker's criticisms were without
foundation. The Agent of the Belgian Government also submitted that
the Court had to consider the case on the basis of the Act of
30th June 1961 and that no one could deny that, by virtue of the
temporary measures of the said Act, De Becker had achieved the purpose
of his Application; that even in the matter of "political expression"
it was possible for De Becker to have recourse to the ordinary courts
of his country to recover the remaining rights of which he has been
deprived. Consequently - in the opinion of the Belgian Government -
the Applicant had no interest in the continuance of proceedings
arising from his Application.

Accordingly, at the hearing of 3rd July 1961 the Agent of the Belgian
Government submitted new conclusions as follows:

"May it please the Court,

1. To rule that in view of present Belgian legislation the Applicant
De Becker has no interest in further proceedings on his application;

2. To rule that in determining the compatibility of Article 123
***ies of the Belgian Penal Code with the provisions of the
Convention, both in regard to the past and the future, the provisions
of the Act of 30th June 1961 must be taken into account;

3. To state that there is no incompatibility between the said
Article 123 ***ies and the provisions of the Convention."

21. The hearing having been adjourned, the Commission submitted on
21st August 1961 a Memorial in which it gave its views on the Act of
30th June 1961.

In this Memorial the Commission - while maintaining its view that the
former Article 123 ***ies was not fully compatible with the Convention -
concluded that the Act of 30th June 1961, in so far as it is
applicable to De Becker, satisfied at least that part of the
Application which the Commission had recognised as being admissible.

In its Memorial of 21st August 1961 and at the hearing of
5th October 1961, the Commission adopted the following conclusions:

"May it please the Court, while confirming the view expressed by the
Commission on the subject of the former Article 123 ***ies of the
Belgian Penal Code, to note that the limitations maintained by the Act
of 30th June 1961 as regards freedom of expression, in so far as these
apply to Mr. De Becker, do not go beyond the 'formalities,
conditions, restrictions or penalties' authorised in Article 10,
paragraph 2 (art. 10-2) of the Convention."

22. At the hearing on 5th October 1961, the Agent of the Belgian
Government emphasised that the views of the Commission and the Belgian
Government were identical concerning the compatibility with the
Convention of Article 123 ***ies of the Belgian Penal Code, as amended
and superseded by the Act of 30th June 1961; he recalled that
parliamentary work on the Act had begun as long ago as 1952 and he
recognised that the opinion of the Commission had contributed to this
task of law-making.

With regard to the past the Agent of the Belgian Government submitted
that there was no longer any need for the Court to give a ruling on
the request of the Commission concerning the former Article 123
***ies, whether it be to confirm the opinion of the Commission on this
point or to reject it, as previously by the Belgian Government.

The Agent of the Belgian Government added that there was no longer a
single person in Belgium to whom the provisions of the former
Article 123 ***ies were applicable.

The Agent of the Belgian Government went on to say that the Commission
could not insist upon the Court giving its opinion regarding the past
unless the Court assumed that the legislative changes of
30th June 1961 were late in taking place. The Agent pointed out that it
was not the Court's function to see whether these legislative changes
were timely or not; if however, the Court did not share this point of
view, the Belgian Government must be given an opportunity of replying
to the arguments by which the Commission sought to justify its
opinion.

The conclusions submitted by the Agent of the Belgian Government at
the hearing of 5th October 1961 were as follows:

"May it please the Court

Disregarding all other fuller or contrary submissions,

To state that there is no incompatibility between Article 123 ***ies
of the Belgian Penal Code, now supplemented and replaced by the Law of
30th June 1961, and the provisions of the Convention;

Insofar as former Article 123 ***ies of the same Code is concerned, to
state that, in view of these circumstances, there is no further need
to deal with any application concerning it."

23. At the same hearing of 5th October 1961 the Commission maintained
that, in asking the Court to confirm the Commission's opinion
regarding the effect of applying the former Article 123 ***ies to
De Becker, it was asking the Court to state that De Becker had been
the victim of a violation of Article 10 (art. 10) of the Convention
between the entry into force of the Convention with respect to
Belgium and promulgation of the Act of 30th June 1961.

The Commission submitted:

"May it please the Court,
[/align]