CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 3 avril 2012

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 151 April 2012 Michelioudakis v. Greece - 54447/10 Judgment 3.4.2012 [Section I] Article 46 Pilot judgment General measures Respondent State required to provide within one year domestic remedy for length of proceedings before the criminal courts   Facts – In February 2003 criminal proceedings were brought against the applicant for incitement to commit perjury. In February 2006 the Criminal Court found him guilty and sentenced him to twenty-two months’ imprisonment. The applicant appealed. In March 2007 the Court of Appeal reduced the sentence to nine months. In May 2007 the applicant appealed to the Court of Cassation. In November 2008 the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment and remitted the case to the Court of Appeal. In March 2009 the Court of Appeal reduced the sentence to seven months. In September 2009 the applicant appealed to the Court of Cassation, which dismissed the appeal in a judgment certified in March 2010. Law Article 6 § 1:Since the present case had not raised any complex factual or legal issues, the Court found that the overall length of the proceedings (more than seven years) had been excessive and failed to satisfy the “reasonable time” requirement. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 13:It had not been shown that the remedy which the applicant could have used in the administrative courts had been effective and available in theory and in practice. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 46 (a)     Application of the pilot-judgment procedure – A large number of judgments delivered before the present case had been brought before the Court provided ample evidence of the problem of the excessive length of criminal proceedings in Greece. Having regard in particular to the chronic and persistent nature of such problems and the large number of people in Greece affected by them, and also to the urgent need to afford rapid and adequate redress at national level to those concerned, the Court considered it appropriate to apply the pilot-judgment procedure in the present case. (b)     Whether or not there was a practice incompatible with the Convention – The fault in the Greek legal system relating to the excessive length of proceedings in the administrative courts, as established in the Vassilios Athanasiou and Others judgment*, was not limited to that category of proceedings but reflected a systemic problem of excessively lengthy proceedings, including in the criminal courts. In that connection, despite the various efforts made in terms of domestic legislation, the Greek legal system had still not introduced a remedy or set of remedies enabling persons facing criminal charges to enforce their right to a hearing within a reasonable time. Since the adoption of the 2007 Interim Resolution**, the Court had delivered more than 40   judgments in which it had found violations of Article 6 §   1 on account of the length of criminal proceedings, as a result either of particularly lengthy proceedings at first instance or of considerable delays in scheduling appeal hearings. It had also found numerous violations of Article   13 on account of the lack of access to an effective remedy within a reasonable time. In addition, more than 250   length-of-proceedings cases against Greece were currently pending before the Court, more than 50 of which related solely to criminal proceedings. In the light of these considerations, this situation had to be viewed as reflecting a practice that was incompatible with the Convention. (c)     General measures to be adopted – Although the best remedy in absolute terms was prevention, a remedy to expedite proceedings in order to prevent them from becoming excessively lengthy would be the most effective solution. However, the introduction of other types of remedies was also conceivable, for example a compensatory remedy or the possibility of reducing a sentence on account of the excessive length of criminal proceedings. Accordingly, while recognising the efforts made by Greece to improve its judicial system, the Court considered that the national authorities should, within one year, introduce an effective domestic remedy, or set of remedies, capable of affording adequate and sufficient redress for the unreasonable length of criminal proceedings. (d)     Procedure to be followed in similar cases – Pending the adoption by the Greek authorities of the necessary measures at national level, adversarial proceedings in all cases relating solely to the length of criminal proceedings in the Greek courts were to be adjourned for a period of one year from the date on which this judgment became final. This would not be to the detriment of the examination in good time of the cases pending before the Court. Article 41: EUR 3,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage. * Vassilios Athanasiou and Others v. Greece , no.   50973/08, 21   December 2010, Information Note no.   136. ** Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)74, in which the Committee of Ministers urged the Greek authorities to remedy the problem of excessive length of proceedings in the administrative courts.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes