CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 2 janvier 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sDEE01590 { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 23 January 2023   THIRD SECTION Application no. 49512/22 Panayiotis ALEXANDROU against Cyprus lodged on 19 October 2022 communicated on 2 January 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the length of the criminal appeal proceedings before the Supreme Court (appeal no. 152/2017) which appear to have lasted approximately five years over one instance of jurisdiction. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention the applicant complains that his right to a fair trial within a reasonable time has been violated on account of the unjustified delays in the examination of his criminal appeal by the Supreme Court. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the length of the criminal proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article   6 §   1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Georgiadis v. Cyprus , no. 50516/99, 14 May 2002)?