20 NEUMEISTER v. AUSTRIA JUDGMENT its exact significance can be judged only in the light of the facts of the case, not "in abstracto". 2. In order to facilitate such evaluation, the Commission believes that it is in general necessary to examine an individual case according to the following seven "criteria", "factors" or "elements": (i) The actual length of detention. The Commission does not mean by this to set an "absolute time-limit" to the length of detention. Neither is it a question of measuring the length of detention by itself; it is simply a matter of using it as one of the criteria for determining whether that length is reasonable or unreasonable. (ii) The length of detention in relation to the nature of the offence, the penalty prescribed and to be expected in the event of conviction and national legislation on the deduction of the period of detention from any sentence passed. The Commission points out that the length of detention may vary according to the nature of the offence, the penalty prescribed and the likely penalty. Nevertheless, it considers that, in judging the relationship between the penalty and the length of detention, account must be taken of the principle of presumption of innocence laid down in Article 6 (2) (art. 6-2) of the Convention. If the period of detention were too similar in length to the sentence to be expected in case of conviction, the principle of presumption of innocence would not be entirely observed. (iii) The material, moral or other effects of detention upon the detained person beyond what are the normal consequences of detention. (iv) The conduct of the accused: (a) Did he contribute to the delay or expedition of the investigation or trial? (b) Were proceedings delayed by applications for release pending trial, appeals or other remedies? (c) Did he request release on bail or offer other guarantees to appear for trial? On this point the Commission considers that an accused who refuses to co-operate with the investigating organs or who uses the remedies open to him is thereby merely availing himself of his rights and should therefore not be penalised for doing so unless he acts in an abusive spirit or to an exaggerated extent. With regard to the conduct of the other accused, the Commission hesitates to accept that this can justify any prolongation of an individual’s detention. (v) The difficulties in the investigation of the case (its complexity in respect of the facts or the number of witnesses or accused, the need to obtain evidence abroad, etc.). (vi) The manner in which the investigation was conducted: (a) the system of investigation applicable;