DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE DE MEYER

(Translation)

The present case was not straightforward. It necessitated a thorough-going investigation, which in the nature of things was bound to take a certain time.

But as already stated by the Federal Court in November 1985, that "could hardly justify detention on remand for years" [*] .

The applicant was in fact deprived of his liberty for slightly over four years before being tried. This interference with "the rule of r espect for individual liberty" [*]  and the presumption of innocence was so serious that I cannot regard it as acceptable [*]   .

[*]  The case is numbered 92/1991/344/417.  The first number is the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the relevant year (second number).  The last two numbers indicate the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications to the Commission.

[*]   As amended by Article 11 of Protocol No. 8 (P8-11), which came into force on 1 January 1990 .

[*]  Note by the Registrar: for practical reasons this annex will appear only with the printed version of the judgment (volume 254-A of Series A of the Publications of the Court), but a copy of the Commission's report is available from the registry.

[*]  My emphasis.

[*]  Paragraph 35 of the Commission's report.

[*]   Neumeister v. Austria judgment of 27 June 1968 , Series A no. 8, p. 37, para. 5.

[*]    If an accused makes use of his right not to "cooperate with the authorities", that may indeed delay the "progress of the investigation" (paragraph 42 in fine of the judgment), but it is not acceptable that he should be made to "bear the consequences" by having his detention prolonged.