CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 29 septembre 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sD37F5C3B { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Communicated on 29 September 2020 Published on 19 October 2020   FIRST SECTION Application no. 82348/17 D.S. against Armenia lodged on 7 December 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant, a Turkmen national who was facing criminal prosecution in his home country, was arrested upon his arrival at the Zvartnots International Airport and on 1 September 2017 his detention pending extradition was ordered by the first-instance court. His appeal against that decision was examined and rejected by the Criminal Court of Appeal on 4   October 2017. On 22 December 2017 the first-instance court extended the applicant’s detention. His appeal against that decision was examined and allowed by the Criminal Court of Appeal on 8 February 2018, and the applicant’s release was ordered. In the meantime, the applicant instituted asylum proceedings in Armenia and was granted refugee status on 1 July 2019. The present application concerns the alleged failure of the Criminal Court of Appeal to carry out a speedy review of the lawfulness of the applicant’s detention pending extradition. Notably, the Court of Appeal examined his appeals against his detention orders, lodged on 6 September and 27 December 2017, on 4 October 2017 and 8 February 2018 respectively, that is in twenty-eight and forty-two days.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the length of the proceedings in the present case, by which the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of his detention orders of 1   September and 22 December 2017, comply with the “speed” requirement of Article   5 §   4 of the Convention (see Mamedova v. Russia , no. 7064/05, §   96, 1 June 2006; Lebedev v. Russia , no. 4493/04, §§ 95-97, 25 October 2007; and Abdulkhakov v. Russia , no. 14743/11, §§ 198-200, 2 October 2012)?