FOGLI DI LAVORO per il Diritto internazionale 3 ... - Giurisprudenza

194
FOGLI DI LAVORO per il Diritto internazionale 3/2008
63. As to the proceedings before the Federal Constitutional
Court, which lasted approximately eleven years and three
months, the Court observes that it has frequently held that
Article 6 § 1 imposes on the Contracting States the duty to
organise their judicial systems in such a way that their courts
can meet each of its requirements, including the obligation to
hear cases within a reasonable time. Although this obligation
also applies to a Constitutional Court, when so applied it cannot
be construed in the same way as for an ordinary court. Its role as
guardian of the Constitution makes it particularly necessary for a
Constitutional Court to take into account on occasion
considerations other than the mere chronological order in which
cases are entered on the list, such as the nature of a case and its
importance in political and social terms. Furthermore, while
Article 6 requires that judicial proceedings be expeditious, it
also lays emphasis on the more general principle of the proper
administration of justice (see, among other authorities, Süßmann
v. Germany, judgment of 16 September 1996, Reports of
Judgments and Decisions 1996-IV, p. 1174, §§ 55-57;
Niederböster v. Germany, no. 39547/98, § 43, ECHR 2003-IV;
Wimmer v. Germany, no. 60534/00, § 30, 24 February 2005; and
Kirsten v. Germany, no. 19124/02, § 45, 15 February 2007).
64. The Court observes that the length of the instant
proceedings cannot be explained by the exceptional
circumstances of German reunification taken alone, as not more
than twelve major decisions quoted by the Government which
had been issued by the first chamber of the Federal
Constitutional Court between July 1991 and July 1997
concerned issues related to German reunification as such (see,
mutatis mutandis, Hesse-Anger v. Germany, no. 45835/99, § 32,
6 February 2003; and Kirsten, cited above, § 47). Neither can
the overall length of the proceedings be justified by the fact that
the Government grouped a number of cases concerning similar
subject matters, as all these cases had been lodged within a short
period of time and the applicant associations' case served as one
of the pilot cases on the subject matter.
65. The Court has previously held that a length of three years
and nine months (see Schwengel v. Germany (dec.), no.
52442/99, 2 March 2000) and a length of four years and eight
months (see Goretzki v. Germany (dec.), no. 5244/99, 24