CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE FOIGHEL

      The applicable criteria for evaluating the reasonableness of the

length of proceedings for the purposes of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1)

are clearly stated in paragraph 60, where the Court says that

reasonableness must be "assessed in the light of the circumstances of

each case and having regard in particular to the complexity of the case

and the conduct of the parties and the relevant authorities".

      This is further developed in paragraph 68, where it is stated

that the obligation in Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) "... cannot be

construed in the same way for a constitutional court as for an

ordinary court ..."

      I find this formulation unfortunate.  While it is obvious that

some constitutional cases may be more complex than some

non-constitutional cases, the mere fact that a case is heard by a

constitutional court cannot by itself change the criteria mentioned in

paragraph 60.  This is further underlined by the fact that in some of

the member States there is no Constitutional Court.

      However, the majority have given me to understand that the

formulation in paragraph 68 is not intended to change or add anything

to the Court's long-standing jurisprudence.