Tokens: 4
.
My
main
objection
to
this
paragraph
is
the
following
.
In
the
three
civil
cases
discussed
in
my
aforementioned
separate
opinion
,
the
Court
found
that
the
Austrian
Administrative
Court
met
the
requirements
of
a
tribunal
within
the
meaning
of
Article
6
para
.
1
(
art
.
6
-
1
)
.
In
the
paragraph
under
discussion
,
however
,
it
reaches
the
opposite
conclusion
,
stressing
that
in
this
case
the
Administrative
Court
was
sitting
in
proceedings
of
a
criminal
nature
.
One
can
not
but
infer
that
the
Court
is
of
the
opinion
that
in
a
case
which
under
national
law
is
an
"
administrative
"
one
but
under
the
Convention
is
a
"
criminal
"
one
,
the
safeguards
afforded
by
the
tribunal
that
is
to
review
the
final
decision
of
the
administrative
bodies
differ
from
those
required
in
a
case
that
under
national
law
is
an
"
administrative
"
one
but
under
the
Convention
is
a
"
civil
"
one
.
I
can
not
see
any
justification
for
such
differentiation
,
which
does
not
find
support
in
the
wording
or
the
purpose
of
Article
6
(
art
.
6
)
[
5
]
.
Nor
does
the
Court
offer
one
,
its
decision
on
this
crucial
point
being
unsupported
by
any
argument
.
This
is
the
more
to
be
regretted
as
this
differentiation
is
contrary
to
the
Court
's
case
-
law
[
6
]
.
Labels: O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O