CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 7 décembre 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s72C8F48C { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both }   Communicated on 7 December 2016   SECOND SECTION Application no. 67141/14 Milenko VIDAK against Croatia lodged on 6 October 2014 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Milenko Vidak, is a Croatian and Serbian national, who was born in 1959 and is currently detained in Lepoglava State Penitentiary. He is represented before the Court by Mr D. Rupčić, a lawyer practising in Sisak. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. 1.     Criminal proceedings On 19 May 1999 an investigating judge at the Sisak County Court (Županijski sud u Sisku) opened an investigation in respect of the applicant on suspicion of murder. The investigating judge also ordered the applicant’s detention and issued a warrant to find and arrest him, as he, among others, had absconded. On 8 May 2009 the investigating judge at the Sisak County Court opened an investigation in respect of the applicant on suspicion of war crime against the civilian population. On an unspecified date the investigating judge issued an international warrant to find and arrest the applicant in connection with both sets of criminal proceedings. On 19 February 2009 the applicant was extradited from the Republic of Turkey. According to the applicant, the extradition was granted only for the proceedings against him on charge of murder. Upon his extradition, the applicant was remanded in detention, in connection with both sets of proceedings. On 17 May 2010 the Sisak County State Attorney (Županijsko državno odvjetništvo u Sisku) lodged an indictment against the applicant on charge of war crime. On 1 June 2010 the three-judge panel of the Sisak County Court remitted the indictment to the Sisak County State Attorney and ordered an additional investigation. On 19 August 2010 the investigating judge of the Sisak County Court extended detention against the applicant, in connection with investigation against him on suspicion of war crime only. On 20 September 2010 the Sisak County State Attorney lodged new indictment against the applicant on charge of war crime. On 20 December 2010 a first-instance judgment was delivered. The Sisak County Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to eight years` imprisonment. The applicant lodged an appeal against the Sisak County court with the Supreme Court, complaining in particular that he had not been extradited from Turkey in connection with charge of war crimes. On 12 July 2010 the Supreme Court (Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske) allowed applicant`s appeal, quashed the first-instance judgment and remitted the case for a retrial finding that the first-instance court should have ascertained whether the applicant was extradited from Turkey in respect on charge of war crime. On 14 September 2011 Sisak County Court abolished detention against the applicant. The applicant, who had meanwhile been convicted on charge of murder in separate set of proceedings by the final judgment, was sent to serve sentence. On 7 December 2011 the trial was transferred to Zagreb County Court (Županijski sud u Zagrebu). On 17 April 2012 a new first-instance judgment was delivered. The Zagreb County Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to six years` imprisonment. The applicant lodged an appeal against the Zagreb County Court with the Supreme Court, complaining in particular that he had not been extradited from Turkey in connection with charge of war crimes. On 12 November 2013 the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the first-instance judgment and remitted the case for a retrial, again on the grounds that the first-instance Court should have ascertained whether the applicant was extradited from Turkey in respect of charge of war crime. On 18 February 2014 The president of the trial panel at Zagreb County Court asked Republic of Turkey the permission for applicant`s extradition in respect of charge on war crime. It appears that the case is still pending before the Zagreb County Court.   2.     Proceedings following the applicant’s request for the protection of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time Meanwhile, on 28 March 2014 the applicant lodged a request for protection of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time with the President of the Zagreb County Court. He relied on section 65 of the 2103 Courts Act. As the President of the Zagreb County Court did not render a decision on applicant`s request within the statutory time-limit of sixty days, on 16 June 2014 the applicant lodged an appeal for failure to respond. On 2 June 2014 the President of the Zagreb County Court dismissed the applicant’s request, holding that, in given circumstances, Zagreb County Court had acted promptly and effectively. On 16 June 2014 the applicant appealed against President`s decision. On 6 August 2014 the President of the Supreme Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal. On 23 September 2014 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint against the second-instance decision. By a decision of 24 December 2014 the Constitutional Court (Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske) declared the applicant’s constitutional complaint inadmissible, holding that the contested second-instance decision was not open to constitutional review.     B.     Relevant domestic law The relevant provisions of the 2013 Courts Act are summarised in the case Novak v. Croatia , no. 7877/14, § 22-27 of 14 June 2016. COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of the above criminal proceedings.       QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has the length of the criminal proceedings in the present case been in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?