W. Communication No. 408/1990, W.J.H. v. the Netherlands (decision of 22 July 1992. adopted at the forty-fifth session) Submitted byt W.J.H. (name deleted) (represented by counsel) Alleged victim; The author State oarty: The Netherlands Date of communication; 15 November 1989 (initial submission) The Human Rights Committee, established under article 28 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Meeting on 22 July 1992, Adopts the following; Decision on admissibility 1, The author of the communication (dated 15 November 1989) is W.J.H., a citizen of the Netherlands, currently residing in Belgium. He claims to be a victim of a violation by the Netherlands of article 14, paragraphs 2 and 6, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. He is represented by counsel. Facts as submitted by the author 2.1 The author "was arrested on 8 December 1983 and kept in pretrial detention until 8 February 1984. On 24 December 1985, the Arnhem Court of Appeal convicted him on a variety of criminal charges, including forgery and fraud. On 17 March 1987, the Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) quashed the earlier conviction and referred the case to the 's-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal, which acquitted the author on 11 May 1988. 2.2 Pursuant to sections 89 and 591a of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the author subsequently filed a request with the 's-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal for award of compensation for damages resulting from the time spent in. pretrial detention and for the costs of legal representation. Section 90, paragraph 1, of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that, after an acquittal, the Court may grant compensation for reasons of equity. On 21 Hovember 1988, the Court of Appeal rejected the author's request. The Court was of the opinion that it would not be fair to grant compensation to the author, since his acquittal was due to a procedural error; it referred in this context to the judgement of the Arnhem Court of Appeal of 24 December 1985, by which the author was convicted on the basis of evidence that later was found to have been irregularly obtained. 2.3 The author claims that, as no legal remedy for the denial of compensation is available, domestic remedies have been exhausted. -420-