80. As regards the period between 2001
and 2006, again relying on the jurisprudence of
the European Court of Human Rights, the Respondent explains that even the slowdown
of investigations which could have been caused
(but
not proven) by the five (5) year
suspension of adversarial procedure between of Marcel Kafando and Racine Yameogo
cannot be blamed on the State, given that “it has been deemed
that the State cannot be blamed for prolongation
on several occasions
of the duration of the proceedings
for
reasons of the illness of a suspect”.
81. On the determination of the period of reasonable time, the Respondent is of the view
that the dies a quo should be the day when Marcel Kafando was arrested (2 February
2001) and the dies ad quiem the day on which the ruling became final, as no appeal was
logged with the “Cour de Cassation” (31 August 2006), that is, five years, six months and
29 days.
82. The Respondent concludes that “in view of the complex nature of the matter and the
comportment ofthe Applicants and their advocates, as stated earlier, one could conclude
that the duration
Investigating
administrative
of the investigation was
Magistrate
authorities
and
normal,
the substantial
of Burkina
Faso”
thanks to the effectiveness
contribution
and
made
that “the said
by the
duration
of the
political
and
meets
the
requirements of reasonable time as set out in community and international instruments,
violations of which are being wrongly attributed to Burkina Faso”.
83. In their submission, the Applicants recall that the judicial remedies they had resorted
to lasted 9 years and would have again been prolonged for five more years if the “Cour
de Cassation” had been seized.
84. They explain that “...in the instant case, it is probable that given the bad faith on the
part of the political authorities, this delay could have been prolonged at will”. They assert
that “article 56(5) of the Charter provides that an Applicant before the Court was not bound
to exhaust local remedies where the judicial process is unduly prolonged’ (sic).
85. In their reply to the preliminary objections, the Applicants noted that in this matter
“they had to wait...for close to two years for the brother of the President of Faso, who
seems to be at the centre of this case of murder of the journalist and his companions, to
2
e~
M\