CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 21 janvier 1998

.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. 32045/96                       by Rocco MORELLI                       against Italy        The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting in private on 21 January 1998, the following members being present:              MM     N. BRATZA, Acting President                  E. BUSUTTIL                  A. WEITZEL                  C.L. ROZAKIS            Mrs    J. LIDDY            MM     L. LOUCAIDES                  B. MARXER                  B. CONFORTI                  I. BÉKÉS                  G. RESS                  A. PERENIC                  C. BÎRSAN                  K. HERNDL                  M. VILA AMIGÓ            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 26 April 1996 by Rocco MORELLI against Italy and registered on 26 June 1996 under file No. 32045/96;        Having regard to:   -     the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of      the Commission;   -     the observations submitted by the respondent Government on 9 June      1997 and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant on      24 July 1997;        Having deliberated;        Decides as follows:   THE FACTS        The applicant is an Italian national, born in 1950 and residing in Palmi (Reggio Calabria).        The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.        On 7 February 1986 S.S. filed a criminal complaint against the applicant for slander with the Treviso Court.        On 5 April 1986 the Treviso Public Prosecutor requested the opening of criminal proceedings against the applicant on charges of slander and extortion; however, on 2 May 1986 the Treviso Court decided to suspend these criminal proceedings awaiting the outcome of another set of criminal proceedings related to the act of slander allegedly committed by the applicant, namely proceedings which had been brought against S.S. and were also pending before the Treviso Court.        Following S.S.'s acquittal by judgment of 28 May 1987, on 5 January 1988 the Treviso Court resumed the criminal proceedings against the applicant. On the same day, it served on the applicant the warning that criminal proceedings had been opened against him, inviting the latter to appoint his defence lawyer.        On 11 October 1990 the applicant was interrogated by the Treviso Public Prosecutor in relation to the charges of inter alia slander and extortion.        On 10 December 1990 the Treviso Public Prosecutor requested that the applicant be committed for trial on charges of slander and extortion.        On 20 December 1990 the Treviso Judge for the Preliminary Investigations fixed the preliminary hearing for 28 February 1991.   (a)   The proceedings relating to the charge of extortion        On 12 April 1991 the Treviso Judge for the Preliminary Investigations committed the applicant for trial on the charge of extortion and summoned him to appear before the Treviso Court at the hearing of 10 June 1991.        By a judgment of 2 October 1991, which was filed with the Registry on 5 October 1991, the Treviso Court acquitted the applicant in relation to the charge of extortion. On 13 November 1991 the Public Prosecutor appealed to the Venice Court of Appeal against this judgment.        On 4 February 1994 the applicant requested the Venice Court of Appeal to speed up the proceedings relating to the charge of extortion.   (b)   The proceedings relating to the charge of slander        On 12 April 1991 the Treviso Judge for the Preliminary Investigations dropped the charge of slander against the applicant.        On 22 April 1991 the Public Prosecutor appealed to the Venice Court of Appeal against this judgment.        By a decision of 25 March 1994, filed with the Registry on 6 April 1994, the Venice Court of Appeal upheld the Public Prosecutor's appeal and committed the applicant for trial before the Treviso Court; the first hearing was fixed at 6 June 1994.        By a judgment of 6 June 1994, filed with the Registry on 13 June 1994, the Treviso Court again acquitted the applicant.        On 21 July 1994 the Public Prosecutor appealed to the Venice Court of Appeal against this judgment. The first appeal hearing was fixed for 22 September 1994.   (c)   The appeal proceedings        On 22 September 1994, the Court of Appeal joined the two proceedings against the applicant pending before it with another set of proceedings pending against S.S. for fraudulent bankruptcy, and adjourned the case to 27 March 1995.        However, on 5 December 1994 the Court of Appeal adjourned the case sine die on grounds that one of the judges had to take part in another trial and could not therefore participate in the applicant's case.        On 1st February 1996 the applicant requested the Venice Court of appeal to resume the proceedings.        On 19 March 1997, the Venice Court of appeal severed the proceedings on the ground that those against S.S. were summary proceedings ("rito abbreviato") unlike those against the applicant.        The first hearing was held on 7 July 1997, and the proceedings were then adjourned to 24 September 1997.        The proceedings are currently pending before the Venice Court of appeal.     COMPLAINTS        The applicant complains under Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention about the length of the criminal proceedings brought against him.     PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION        The application was introduced on 26 April 1996 and registered on 26 June 1996.        On 9 April 1997 the Commission decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government.        The Government's written observations were submitted on 9 June 1997. The applicant replied on 24 July 1997.     THE LAW        The applicant complains of the length of the criminal proceedings brought against him on charges of slander and extortion. He alleges a violation of Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention which insofar as relevant reads as follows:        "In the determination of any charge against him, everyone is      entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by a ...      tribunal ...".        The Commission observes that the proceedings at issue began at the latest on 5 January 1988 and are currently pending; the global length of the proceedings is thus at least ten years.        The respondent Government argue that the length of the proceedings cannot be regarded as unreasonable in view of the procedural complexity of the case and of the number of instances. The applicant submits that such length is excessive, particularly in the light of what is at stake for him in the proceedings, namely his reputation.        The Commission considers, in the light of the criteria established by the case-law of the Convention organs on the question of the "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 a thorough examination of this complaint is required both as to the law and as to the facts. No other ground for declaring it inadmissible has been established.        For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,        DECLARES THE APPLICATION ADMISSIBLE, without prejudging the      merits of the case.          M.F. BUQUICCHIO                               N. BRATZA         Secretary                               Acting President    to the First Chamber                       of the First Chamber