DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE VAJIĆ

I do not agree with the opinion of the majority that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention for the following reasons:

In my opinion the case was undoubtedly a very complex one. The four and a half years of the preliminary investigation (after the deduction of the delays caused by the applicant (§ 20), and not more than five years and one month as stated in § 35, do not seem to be too long a period having in mind that the case was part of the investigation relating to  the “WEB/IMMAG” Group during which criminal proceedings against 97 persons were instituted (§ 10), the disclosure of 800 bank accounts was ordered in Austria and abroad, 410 letters rogatory were transferred to foreign judicial authorities, and some 8,000 volumes of documents were seized and examined (§ 30). I am also not convinced by the majority's argument as to the finding that the case should and indeed could have been distinguished from the remainder of the investigations into the "WEB-case" (§ 33).

There is, on the other hand, a very long period for which no explication was given by the Government, that being the period of more than eleven months needed for the preparation of the written version of the judgment of 12 pages. The Court has, however, not found a violation as to the trial part of the proceedings (§ 36).