Lexploria

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST CHAMBER

Application No. 22421/93

Annunziata Palermiti

against

Italy

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

(adopted on 28 February 1996)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. INTRODUCTION

(paras. 1-11). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

A. The application

(paras. 2-4). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

B. The proceedings

(paras. 5-8). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

C. The present Report

(paras. 9-11) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

II. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FACTS

(paras. 12-16) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

III. OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

(paras. 17-27) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

A. Complaint declared admissible

(para. 17). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

B. Point at issue

(para. 18). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

C. As regards Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention

(paras. 19-26). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

1. The period to be taken into consideration

(para. 20) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

2. Reasonableness of the length of the proceedings

(paras. 21-26) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

CONCLUSION

(para. 27). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

APPENDIX : DECISION OF THE COMMISSION AS TO THE

ADMISSIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION . . . . . . .6

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The following is an outline of the case as submitted to the

European Commission of Human Rights, and of the procedure before the

Commission.

A. The application

2. The applicant is an Italian citizen, born in 1925 and residing

in Reggio Calabria. She was represented before the Commission by

Mr. Domenico Callea.

3. The application is directed against Italy. The respondent

Government were represented by Mr. Umberto Leanza, Head of the

Diplomatic Legal Service, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

4. The case concerns a complaint about the length of criminal

proceedings in respect of charges of unauthorized building and unlawful

removal of official seals. The applicant invokes Article 6 para. 1 of

the Convention.

B. The proceedings

5. The application was introduced on 18 May 1993 and registered on

5 August 1993.

6. On 28 February 1995 the Commission (First Chamber) decided,

pursuant to Rule 48 para. 2 (b) of its Rules of Procedure, to give

notice of the application to the respondent Government and to invite

the parties to submit written observations on its admissibility and

merits.

7. The Government's observations were submitted on 30 May 1995. The

applicant replied on 16 June 1995.

8. On 6 September 1995 the Commission declared the application

admissible. The Commission's decision on the admissibility of the

application is annexed hereto.

C. The present Report

9. The Commission (First Chamber), having found that there is no

basis on which a friendly settlement pursuant to Article 28 para. 1 (b)

of the Convention can be effected, has drawn up the present report in

pursuance of Article 31 of the Convention and after deliberations and

votes, the following members being present:

Mr. C.L. ROZAKIS, President

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. E. BUSUTTIL

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. MARXER

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

E. KONSTANTINOV

G. RESS

A. PERENIC

C. BÎRSAN

K. HERNDL

10. The text of this Report was adopted on 28 February 1996 by the

Commission and is now transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the

Council of Europe, in accordance with Article 31 para. 2 of the

Convention.

11. The purpose of the Report, pursuant to Article 31 of the

Convention, is:

(i) to establish the facts, and

(ii) to state an opinion as to whether the facts found disclose

a breach by the State concerned of its obligations under

the Convention.

II. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FACTS

12. By act ("ordine di comparizione") of 22 October 1987, notified

on 30 October 1987, the applicant was summoned to appear before the

Public Prosecutor of Reggio Calabria on 16 November 1987, in order to

be interrogated. She was charged with unauthorized building and

unlawful removal of official seals ("violazione di sigilli").

13. These proceedings were connected with a previous set of criminal

proceedings instituted against the applicant on similar charges and

which came to an end by judgment of 8 July 1986 with the applicant's

conviction by the Reggio Calabria magistrate ("Pretore").

14. On 16 November 1987, the applicant was interrogated by the Public

Prosecutor in her counsel's presence.

15. On 1 October 1988, the Public Prosecutor requested that the

applicant be committed for trial on charges of unauthorized building

and unlawful removal of official seals.

16. By judgment of 7 February 1994, the Reggio Calabria Court

dismissed the first charge as time-barred and the second following an

amnesty.

III. OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

A. Complaint declared admissible

17. The Commission has declared admissible the applicant's complaint

about the length of the criminal proceedings instituted against her.

B. Point at issue

18. The only point at issue is whether the length of the proceedings

against the applicant exceeded the "reasonable time" referred to in

Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention.

C. As regards Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention

19. The relevant part of Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the

Convention provides as follows:

"In the determination (...) of any criminal charge against him,

everyone is entitled to a (...) hearing within a reasonable time

by [a] tribunal (...)."

1. The period to be taken into consideration

20. The period to be taken into consideration began on 30 October

1987, when the applicant was first summoned to appear before the Public

Prosecutor of Reggio Calabria, and ended on 7 February 1994, when the

Reggio Calabria court dismissed the first charge as time-barred and the

second following an amnesty. The period under consideration is

therefore six years, three months and eight days.

2. Reasonableness of the length of the proceedings

21. The Commission recalls that:

"The reasonableness of the length of the proceedings is to be

assessed in the light of the particular circumstances of the

case, regard being had to the criteria laid down in the Court's

case-law, in particular the complexity of the case, the

applicant's conduct and that of the competent authorities ..."

(Eur. Court H.R., Kemmache judgment of 27 November 1991, Series A

no. 218, p. 27, para. 60).

22. The Government disclaim any responsibility on the part of the

judicial authorities by invoking the difficult situation faced by the

Reggio Calabria court as a result of the exceptional backlog of cases,

as well as the lack of sufficient staff to deal with such a situation.

23. The applicant submits in this regard that it was for the Italian

authorities to find a solution to the aforementioned problems.

24. The Commission recalls that the Contracting States are under a

duty to organise their legal systems so as to enable the courts to

comply with the requirements of Article 6 para. 1, (Art. 6-1) including

that of a trial within a "reasonable time" (cf. Eur. Court H.R.,

Baggetta judgment of 25 June 1987, Series A no. 119-B, p. 32, par. 23).

25. The Commission notes that the Reggio Calabria court took over

five years from the date when the Public Prosecutor requested that the

applicant be committed for trial to deliver its judgment (1 October

1988 to 7 February 1994). The Commission has considered the

submissions of the parties in this respect, and finds that this delay,

which is attributable to the competent authorities, is not convincingly

explained by the Government.

26. In light of the criteria and circumstances of the case described

above, the Commission considers that the length of the proceedings in

this case, being over six years and three months, has not been

justified by the Government. Consequently the Commission finds that

the reasonable time referred to in Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the

Convention has been exceeded.

CONCLUSION

27. The Commission concludes, unanimously, that in the present case

there has been a violation of Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the

Convention.

Secretary to the First Chamber President of the First Chamber

(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (C.L. ROZAKIS)

Menu

PALERMITI v. ITALY

PALERMITI v. ITALY

LEXI