SECOND SECTION
DECISION
AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application no. 41893/98
by Michele MARTINEZ
against Italy
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section) sitting on 21 October 1999 as a Chamber composed of
MrC. Rozakis, President,
MrM. Fischbach,
MrB. Conforti,
MrG. Bonello,
MrsV. Strážnická,
MrP. Lorenzen,
MrsM. Tsatsa-Nikolovska, judges,
andMrE. Fribergh, Section Registrar;
Having regard to the application introduced on 2 April 1998 and registered on 25 June 1998;
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant is an Italian national born in 1931 and residing in Rome. He works for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Before the Court he is represented by Mr Sergio Gentile and Mr Ruggero Gentile, two lawyers practising in Rome.
On 30 March 1993 the applicant received the official notification that preliminary investigations had been opened against him for corruption and forgery. On 7 December 1994 the Public Prosecutor's Office requested the investigating judge to commit the applicant for trial. The applicant was heard by certain police officers in April 1995.
On 23 March 1996 the applicant was committed for trial before the Rome District Court together with four co-accused.
The first hearing, scheduled for 26 June 1996, was adjourned to 8 January 1997 at the request of one of the accused. After one hearing, held on 6 February 1997, a number of witnesses were heard by the court on 12 February, 26 and 27 March 1997. A hearing scheduled for 9 April 1997 was adjourned until 4 February 1998 because of the legitimate impediment of one of the accused.
Further hearings took place on 13 February, 4 and 26 March, 10 April and 8 May 1998. On 11 November 1998 the case was adjourned because of a lawyers' strike until 11 January 1999, then postponed until 25 January by reason of the absence of certain witnesses. After two hearings, held on 27 January and 8 February 1999, on 22 February 1999 the case was once again postponed until 26 April 1999 because of a lawyers' strike. On 16 May 1999, the proceedings were adjourned until 21 April 2000.
THE LAW
The applicant's complaint relates to the length of the proceedings in question. These proceedings began on 30 March 1993 and are still pending.
According to the applicant, the overall duration of the proceedings - a period of more than six years and six months - is in breach of the "reasonable time" requirement laid down in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. The Government disputed this claim.
The Court considers, in the light of the criteria established in its case-law on the question of "reasonable time" (the complexity of the case, the applicant's conduct and that of the competent authorities), and having regard to all the information in its possession, that an examination of the merits of this complaint is required.
For these reasons, unanimously, the Court
DECLARES THE APPLICATION ADMISSIBLE, without prejudging the merits of the case.
Erik FriberghChristos Rozakis
Registrar President
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy