The article deals with the issue of determining the criteria of a reasonable time of criminal pro- ceedings. The paper designates the factors, which are determined by the European Court of Human Rights in cases, related to the violation of a reasonable time of the criminal proceedings.

The formation of the requirements for the judicial review of cases within the reasonable time has its historical origins. As an example, the author refers to such historical documents as The Novgorod Judicial Charter (the middle of the XV century), The Code of «Laws under which the people of Little Russia are suing» (1734), and The Regulations of Criminal Proceedings of 1864.

The author notes that in the Ukrainian criminal proceedings the principle of «reasonable time» was for the first time enshrined in 2012 in the Article 28 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The legislator defines the «reasonable time» as the period, which is objectively necessary for the performance of procedural actions and decision-making process. Such terms should not exceed the provided by the Criminal Procedure Code terms, which regulate the performance order of certain proceedings or decision-making process.

The paragraph 3 of article 28 of the Criminal Procedure Code defines the criteria for determining the reasonable terms of criminal proceedings. According to the Ukrainian legislator, these criteria are the followings: – complicated nature of criminal proceedings, which is determined taking into account the number of suspects, accused and criminal offences subject to this proceeding, the scope and specifics of the procedural actions required for pre-trial investigation to be completed, etc.; – attitude of participants to criminal proceedings; – the way in which investigator, public prosecutor, and court exercise their powers.

In order to determine the «reasonable time» in criminal proceedings the European Court eval- uates the following factors: – the total duration of the trial; – the complexity of the case; – the con- sequences for the applicant party for the noncompliance of a reasonable time of the proceedings; – personal conduct of the accused; – the work efficiency of the court.

In the article the author provides the analysis of each of these factors and provides the examples from the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights.

Keywords: criminal proceedings, human rights, fair trial, a reasonable time.