25 Jun Loss of victim status if the court acknowledges that a certain part of the sentence has already been served as a form of compensation for the excessive long proceeding

In the case of Chiarello v. Germany (application no. 497/17, 20/06/2019) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case concerned the length of criminal proceedings. 

Mr Chiarello worked as a prison guard in Saarbrücken. In May 2008 he was accused of accepting a bribe of 200 euros (EUR), smuggling the telephone into the prison and of providing it to an inmate. The applicant appealed, and the Regional Court acquitted him in November 2011. In April 2015, after the prosecutor’s appeal, the Regional Court found Mr Chiarello guilty of taking a bribe and sentenced him to eight months’ imprisonment. However, it suspended the sentence, put him on probation and declared that three months had been served owing to the excessively long proceedings.

The Court found that the criminal proceedings in the applicant’s case had lasted eight years and five months at four levels of jurisdiction. As to whether that was reasonable, the Court in particular noted that Mr Chiarello’s case had involved seven co-defendants, all represented by counsel, and the comprehensive taking of evidence. Mr Chiarello had not been remanded in custody and a severe sentence had not been at stake, although the proceedings had had considerable implications for him as his employment as a civil servant had been at stake.

However, there had been a period of prolonged inactivity between January 2013 and February 2015.

The Court noted that the Regional Court had expressly acknowledged that the criminal proceedings had been excessively long on account of that prolonged inactivity, although Mr Chiarello had not been awarded compensation, nor had the proceedings been discontinued owing to their unreasonable length. However, the Regional Court had counted three months of his sentence as having been served, a form of compensation.

Nevertheless, such a form of compensation was not theoretical but had mitigated the threat of imprisonment, reducing it from eight to five months, thus in an express and measurable manner. 

The Court also found in particular that Mr Chiarello could no longer claim to be a “victim” within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention since declaring three months of his suspended prison sentence as having been served constituted sufficient and adequate redress for unreasonably long criminal proceedings. Accordingly, there had been no violation of Article 6 § 1.

References from the official website of the European Court of Human Rights