Ugh, I think it's the same old subterfuge and arrogant self-protection on the part of the Italian criminal justice system. They're not far off the likes of Turkiye, Egypt or Russia in that regard. Whether Knox will have the stomach - and the available funds - to spend another several years going back to the ECHR and then through the Italian courts once again. is open to question. It's a disgrace, of course, but nobody should be surprised at that I guess.
Your question, as to whether Knox would have the will and the means to continue her effort to have the calunnia against Lumumba re-conviction overturned by a second request for a retrial under CPP Article 628 bis following a second application to the ECHR and, of course, the requisite second final ECHR judgment finding a new violation of Convention Article 6.1, is on the mark.
Based on some statements, IIRC, by her lawyers as reported in the media, I
suspect there is an intent to file a new application to the ECHR. That may not necessarily be true. She has 4 months after the delivery to her and her lawyers of the MR to file an application, according to the Convention. The Boni CSC panel MR was filed 7 April 2025 in the CSC clerical registry, so the ECHR application deadline is
approximately 7 August 2025 (it may be later by a few days to allow for delivery time to the lawyers or Knox).
Regarding the expenses expected in an application and any follow-up written responses to questions from the ECHR, an estimate of these can be obtained by examining the 2019 final ECHR judgment Knox v. Italy, paragraphs 193 and 195. Knox had requested 30,000 EUR for those expenses but was rewarded only 8,000 EUR as compensation for those expenses. So apparently Knox suffered a loss of 22,000 EUR on the ECHR case.
While the ECHR judgment wording is not clear, it seems that Knox had also requested compensation for her legal costs before the domestic courts, but the ECHR rejected her request on the grounds that it lacked sufficient detail. I speculate that part of the problem may have been the difficulty of isolating the costs of defending against the calunnia charge when the lawyers were at the same time, in the same courts, defending against the murder/rape charges.
However, even if Knox were not to start a second ECHR case claiming that her rights under Convention Article 6.1 had been violated by the re-trial and re-conviction, there is some supervisory action that the DEJ/CoM must take under CoE international law to obtain an Action Plan/Report from Italy to achieve a final resolution of the 2019 Knox v. Italy case.