[align=left]In reply to this complaint the District Court wrote on .. December
1965, stating that the Minister's direction of which the Applicant had
complained was cancelled but added that this did not mean that
permission was given for the Applicant to take part in or attend
communist directed functions.

The Applicant also repeated his contention that the mere fact that he
did not have to go to prison did not mean that he had not suffered
injury. In support of this contention he points out that the total
period of probation was increased to nearly 8 years instead of 3 as
fixed in 1959, not to speak of the effect on his reputation and the
expense and nervous strain involved.

THE LAW

Whereas the Applicant complains that on .. September 1959, he was
convicted by the Regional Court of Lüneburg of being an officer in a
subversive organisation and sentenced to 9 months' imprisonment;

Whereas the Court suspended this sentence and placed the Applicant on
probation for a period of 3 years on the condition that during that
period he refrained from participation in communist directed
manifestations such as World Festivals of Sport, Young Workers
Congresses and similar events;

Whereas Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention provides that the
Commission may only deal with a matter "within a period of 6 months
from the date on which the final decision was taken"; and whereas the
decision of the Federal Court, which was the final decision regarding
the subject of this complaint, was given on .. January 1960; whereas
the present Application was not submitted to the Commission until 8
February 1965, that is more than 6 months after the date of this
decision; whereas, furthermore, an examination of the case does not
disclose the existence of any special circumstances which might have
interrupted or suspended the running of that period; whereas it follows
that this part of the Application has been lodged out of time (Articles
26 and 27, paragraph (3) (Art. 26, 27-3), of the Convention);

Whereas, in regard to the Applicant's complaint that by a decision of
the Regional Court of Lüneburg of .. June 1964, the suspension of his
sentence was revoked on the ground that the Applicant had not complied
with the conditions which the court had imposed upon him, it is to be
observed that the Convention, under the terms of Article 1 (Art. 1),
guarantees only the rights and freedoms set forth in Section I of the
Convention; and whereas, under Article 25, paragraph (1) (Art. 25-1),
only the alleged violation of one of those rights and freedoms by a
Contracting Party can be the subject of an application presented by a
person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals; whereas
otherwise its examination is outside the competence of the Commission
ratione materiae; whereas no right to the suspension on probation of
a sentence pronounced by a court in a criminal case, nor to the
continued enjoyment of such suspension once granted, is as such
included among the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention;[/align]