CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 21 octobre 1999

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s598389FD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:16pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s75AF5381 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; display:none } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .sBA8DCCFC { width:35.45pt; display:inline-block } .s31BEBB9E { width:7.26pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sE55CAA3E { width:1.26pt; display:inline-block } .s9872C2C6 { width:15.43pt; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s45AE5F73 { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:-0.15pt } .s22CB0842 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:-0.15pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s13F94BDE { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:-0.1pt } .s908FE487 { width:3.32pt; display:inline-block } .s8AFB426F { width:32.67pt; display:inline-block } .sEA111250 { width:16.65pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION   DECISION   AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF   Application no. 41513/98 by Luigi DI DONATO, Raffaele ROMANO, Vincenzo LA BROCCA and Luigi NUNZIATO against Italy     The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section) sitting on 21 October 1999 as a Chamber composed of     Mr   C. Rozakis, President ,   Mr   M. Fischbach,   Mr   B. Conforti,   Mr   G. Bonello,   Mrs   V. Strážnická,   Mr   P. Lorenzen,   Mrs   M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska, judges ,   and   Mr   E. Fribergh, Section Registrar ;     Having regard to the application introduced on 26 November 1997 and registered on 25 June 1998;     Having deliberated, decides as follows:   THE FACTS     The applicants are four Italian nationals, born respectively in 1937, 1941, 1949 and 1956 and currently residing in Benevento. They are represented before the Court by Mr   Giovanni Romano, a lawyer practising in Benevento.     In 1990 and 1991, the applicants were members of the Benevento Town Council (“ giunta municipale di Benevento ”). On 21 January 1993 the Benevento Public Prosecutor's Office informed the applicants that criminal proceedings had been instituted against them for abuse of power and misconduct in office. On 17 April and 29 November 1993 and 31 May 1994, the Benevento Public Prosecutor requested the investigating judge to prolong the maximum period for the duration of the investigations.     On 26 January 1995, the Benevento Public Prosecutor's Office requested that the applicants and twenty-four other persons be committed for trial on the above-mentioned charges. The preliminary hearing, scheduled for 22 March 1995, was adjourned on three occasions because the lawyers of the Benevento Bar Association were on strike and eventually took place on 4 July 1995. A hearing scheduled for 10 July 1995 was also postponed because of the lawyers' strike. On 22 and 25 September 1995, some of the accused were examined. The proceedings were adjourned to 6 October 1995.     After two hearings, on 1 December 1995, the investigating judge ordered a stay of proceedings pending a Constitutional Court judgment concerning a procedural issue which he considered to be relevant to the present case. The proceedings having been resumed, on 18   April 1997, the parties presented their final submissions.     In a judgment of the same day, filed with the registry on 3 May 1997, the Benevento investigating judge decided to drop all the charges against the applicants. This decision became final on 3 June 1997.   THE LAW     The applicants' complaint relates to the length of the proceedings in question. These proceedings began on 21 January 1993 and ended on 3 June 1997 .     According to the applicants, the overall duration of the proceedings - a period of four years, four months and thirteen days - 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 Fribergh             Christos Rozakis       Registrar                    President