CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 10 septembre 1997

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                      AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF                       Application No. 28594/95                     by Eugenio GHIGNONI                     against Italy          The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting in private on 10 September 1997, the following members being present:             Mrs. J. LIDDY, President           MM.   M.P. PELLONPÄÄ                E. BUSUTTIL                A. WEITZEL                C.L. ROZAKIS                L. LOUCAIDES                B. MARXER                B. CONFORTI                N. BRATZA                I. BÉKÉS                G. RESS                A. PERENIC                C. BÎRSAN                K. HERNDL           Mrs. M. HION           Mr.   R. NICOLINI             Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber        Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;        Having regard to the application introduced on 18 May 1995 by Eugenio GHIGNONI against Italy and registered on 19 September 1995 under file No. 28594/95;        Having regard to   -     the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of      the Commission;   -     the observations submitted by the respondent Government on      20 January 1997 and the observations in reply submitted by the      applicant on 14 March 1997;        Having deliberated;        Decides as follows:   THE FACTS        The applicant is an Italian national born in 1957 and currently residing in Rome.        The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.        In pursuance of a warrant of arrest issued on 26 July 1982 by the Rome Investigating Judge against 213 persons, the applicant was arrested on 8 August 1982 while crossing the border from France to Italy, under suspicion of belonging to the criminal association known as "Brigate Rosse".        The applicant was interrogated twice in the absence of his lawyers and availed himself of the faculty not to answer; on 24 August 1982 he requested to be interrogated once again after speaking to his lawyers. The examination was held on 22 September 1982.        In the meantime, on 28 August 1982 two identification parades were carried out; however, these were later declared null and void.        The applicant was held in custody in isolation until 12 April 1983 in Rome; he was then transferred to Trani prison.        On 13 August 1984 the applicant was committed for trial before the Rome Court of Assizes on charges, inter alia, of belonging to the Brigate Rosse, murder of a police officer and kidnapping.        The first hearing took place on 16 June 1986; the applicant was transferred to Palmi prison and, on the occasion of hearings, to Rome.        On 26 June 1986 the applicant was released, the time-limits for detention on remand having expired.        By judgment of 12 October 1988, filed with the Registry on 6 June 1989, the applicant was convicted of all charges and sentenced to life imprisonment as well as to thirty years' imprisonment.        The applicant lodged an appeal against this judgment before the Rome Appellate Court of Assizes; the latter, by judgment of 6 March 1992 acquitted the applicant of the charge of murder, confirmed his conviction of the other charges and sentenced him to seventeen years' imprisonment.        The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law; by judgment of 10 May 1993, filed with the Registry on 11 December 1993, the Court of Cassation quashed the Appellate Court of Assizes' judgment and referred the case back before another section of the Rome Appellate Court of Assizes.        The first hearing before the latter was held on 6 July 1994; another hearing was held on 17 November 1994.        By judgment delivered on 24 November 1994 and filed with the Registry on 19 January 1995, the applicant was acquitted of all charges. The judgment has become final on 28 November 1994.COMPLAINT        The applicant alleges that the length of the criminal proceedings instituted against him on charges of belonging to the "Brigate Rosse", murder and kidnapping exceeded the "reasonable time" referred to in Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention.   PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION        The application was introduced on 18 May 1995 and registered on 19 September 1995.        On 16 October 1996 the Commission decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government, pursuant to Rule 48 para. 2 (b) of the Rules of Procedure.        The Government's written observations were submitted on 20 January 1997. The applicant replied on 14 March 1997.   THE LAW        The applicant complains about the length of the criminal proceedings instituted against him. He invokes Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention, according to which:        "In the determination of ... any criminal charge against      him, everybody is entitled to a ... hearing within a      reasonable time ...".        The Commission notes that proceedings started on 8 August 1982 when the applicant was arrested (see Eur. Court HR, Messina c. Italia judgment of 26 February 1993, p. 103, para. 25), and ended on 28 November 1994, when the applicant's acquittal became final. The overall length is thus twelve years, three months and twenty days for four degrees of jurisdiction.        The Government argue that the delays in the proceedings are mainly due to the complexity of the procedure, the number of co-accused and the joinder of several proceedings. They also point out that there were no periods of total inactivity during the investigations. The Government maintain that in the present case the overall duration of the proceedings cannot be regarded as being unreasonable.        The applicant contends that the excessive length is due to the conduct of the judicial authorities, namely to their decision to join several proceedings.        The Commission considers, in the light of the criteria established by the case-law of the Convention organs on the question of "reasonable time", and having regard to all the information in its possession, that an examination of the merits of the complaint is required.        For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,        DECLARES THE APPLICATION ADMISSIBLE, without prejudging the      merits of the case.          M.F. BUQUICCHIO                          J. LIDDY         Secretary                             President    to the First Chamber                  of the First Chamber