Özet:

Abstract The concept of access to justice is enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It encompasses a number of core rights and the requirements arising therefrom constitute the main obligations for high contracting parties to the convention. Thus, ensuring the materialization of those rights in their respective domestic legal systems should, in fact, be perceived as the sole priority of the member states in terms of guaranteeing adequate human rights protection framework. The right to a fair trial protected by Article 6 of the convention provides that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time in the determination of his civil rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him. In simpler words, it says that proceedings shouldn’t be excessively long. At first glance, the implementation of a reasonable time requirement seems very easy. On the other hand, if we look just a little bit deeper, several factors that hinder hearing from being within a reasonable timeframe will therefore appear, which as usual results in preventing the proper administration of the justice. Apparently, the importance of this right is itself obvious; however, alleging the violation to have proceedings concluded within a reasonable period of the time is by far the most common issue raised in applications to the ECtHR. The article analyzes the concept of the reasonable time requirement. Afterward, it describes the identification of the relevant period that ought to be taken into account while assessing the reasonableness. Lastly, the paper tries to illustrate the key criteria applied by ECtHR in order to determine the reasonableness of the proceedings referring key standards set by the court itself and examines if the methodology used by the court while assessing the reasonable length of the proceedings is the right approach to the problem.

Anahtar Kelimeler: