Relying on this Court's judgment in Howarth v. the United Kingdom, (no. 38081/97, 21 September 2000) they argued that this delay constituted a breach of the reasonable time requirement under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

The Court recalls its judgment in the case of Howarth v. the United Kingdom (no. 38081/97, §§ 29 and 30, 21 September 2000), relied on by the applicant at paragraph 58 above.

Applying these principles to the situation before it, the Court finds that Mr Yankov was subject to a "charge" from the moment when the police took a statement from him in which he confessed to taking part in the commission of the offence, that is, 27 January 1995 (see Howarth v. the United Kingdom, no. 38081/97, §§ 8, 9 and 20, 21 September 2000, and Martins and Garcia Alves v. Portugal, no. 37528/97, §§ 9, 10 and 20, 16 November 2000).

The Court finds no indication of treatment attaining the "minimum level of severity" at which Article 3 of the Convention becomes relevant (see Howarth v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 38081/97, 14 September 1999).

However, it does not appear that the applicant has suffered any anguish beyond that which is ordinary in cases of criminal proceedings of allegedly excessive duration, and the Court does not consider that such suffering reaches a sufficient level of severity to be characterised as inhuman or degrading treatment falling within the scope of Article 3 of the Convention (see Howarth v. the United Kingdom, no. 38081/97, § 31, 21 September 2000, and Osmanov and Husseinov v. Bulgaria (dec.), nos.

The Court recalls its judgment in the case of Howarth v. the United Kingdom (no. 38081/97, §§ 29 and 30, 21 September 2000).