KONSTAS v. GREECE JUDGMENT 12 made; the time that passes before the competent court examines the merits of the case is therefore not a crucial factor in the assessment of the complaint under Article 6 § 2 of the Convention. In any event, to accept the Government’s argument would be drawing an unreasonable conclusion for the purposes of the Convention, namely that the longer the criminal proceedings, the more any disregard for the presumption of innocence at an earlier stage of the same proceedings could be minimised. 45. In conclusion, the Court finds that the remarks made by the Deputy Minister of Finance on 11 June 2007 and the Minister of Justice on 12 February 2008 went far beyond a mere reference to the applicant’s conviction by judgment no. 2444/2007. The Court pays particular attention to the fact that the remarks were made by high-ranking politicians and even, in the case of the Minister of Justice, by a person of authority whose position required him to show particular restraint when commenting on judicial decisions. The above considerations are sufficient for the Court to be able to conclude that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention in respect of the proceedings pending before the Athens Court of Appeal, on account of the statements made by the Deputy Minister of Finance and the Minister of Justice. ... FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY 1. Declares the complaint under Article 6 § 2, concerning the statements made by members of the Government, and the complaint under Article 13 of the Convention, concerning the statements made by the Deputy Minister of Finance and the Minister of Justice, admissible ... ; 2. Holds that there has been no violation of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention in respect of the Prime Minister’s statements; 3. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention in respect of the statements made by the Deputy Minister of Finance and the Minister of Justice; ...