CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 mai 2024

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 3 June 2024   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 11625/22 Robert RENTSCH against Portugal lodged on 21 February 2022 communicated on 17 May 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged violation of the applicant’s right to a speedy judicial appeal concerning the lawfulness of his placement in pre ‑ trial detention. On 30 March 2021 the applicant was arrested for suspicion of drug trafficking while a search with a warrant was being carried out in a garage where he worked and was found to be where he resided. On 31 March 2021 the applicant was presented to the investigating judge of the Criminal Investigation Court of Lisbon who decided to place him in pre-trial detention due to the nature of the crime under investigation and the risk of reoffending. On 28 April 2021 the applicant appealed the decision to the Court of Appeal of Lisbon. On 24 June 2021, 23 August 2021, 27 September 2021, and 13   January 2022 the investigating judge of the Criminal Investigation Court of Lisbon decided to maintain the applicant in pre-trial detention considering there had not been any relevant changes since the opening of the investigation. By a judgment of 10 August 2021 the Court of Appeal of Lisbon confirmed the decision of the investigating judge of 31 March 2021 to place the applicant in pre-trial detention, on account, namely, of the nature of the offence imputed to him. At the time the application was lodged (21 February 2022) the applicant was still in pre-trial detention. The applicant complains under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention that his request for a review of the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention was not examined speedily. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the length of the proceedings before the Appeal Court of Lisbon in which the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of his pre-trial detention, comply with the “speed” requirement of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? (see Ilnseher v. Germany [GC], nos. 10211/12 and 27505/14, §§   254-256, 4 December 2018; Rehbock v. Slovenia , no. 29462/95, §   84, ECHR 2000-XII;   and Martins O’Neill Pedrosa v. Portugal , no.   55214/15, §§   46-51, 14 February 2017).   The parties are invited to provide an update concerning the development of the criminal proceedings at domestic level.