S, Communication Ho. 398/1990. A.M. v. Finland (decision of 23 July 1992. adopted at the forty-fifth session) Submitted by: A.M. (name deleted) Alleged victim; The author's wife party: Date of communication: Finland 24 January 1990 (initial submission) The Human Rights Committee, established under article 28 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Bights, Meeting on 23 July 1992, Adopts the following: Decision on admissibility 1. The author of the communication (initial submission dated 24 January 1990) is A.M., a Finnish citizen, born in 1924 and residing in Turku, Finland. He submits the communication on behalf of his wife, who claims to be the victim of a violation of articles 2, paragraph 2, and 5, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by Finland. Facts as submitted by the author 2.1 The author and his wife concluded a real estate deal in 1984. He claims that, in the context of this deal, the sum of 322,164 Finnish marklcaa, of which he and his wife were the owners, should have been credited to their account in a Finnish commercial bank. However, this bank, which had financed the deal, allegedly appropriated the securities that had been handed over to it by the author and his wife to the debtor, approximately 10 days after the conclusion of the deal. 2.2 The author indicates that he filed a civil suit against the bank with the City Court of Turku on 14 June 1988. The City Court dismissed the complaint and the author and his wife appealed to the Court of Appeal of Turku on 6 April 1989; the Court of Appeal has not yet adjudicated the appeal. 2.3 The author further indicates that he also reported the alleged fraud to the City Police of Turku; in this context, he claims to have documentary proof that the defendant misled the City Court. At the author's request, the criminal investigation branch of the Turku police carried out an investigation, but on 27 June 1989, the acting public prosecutor decided not to bring charges. This decision was in turn appealed to the Chancellor of Justice of Finland, who rejected the author's complaint as unfounded. Subseguently the author petitioned the Ministry of Justice, without results. Complaint 3. The author claims that his wife is a victim of a violation by Finland of articles 2 and 5 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, -403-