4.  The applicant was born in 1948 and lives in the city of Simferopol. 5.  On 29 August 1997 the Transport Prosecutor of the Crimea (hereinafter “the Prosecutor”) instituted criminal proceedings against the applicant on charge of a violation of labour legislation (Article 135 of the Criminal Code of 1960). 6.  On 17 October 1997 the Prosecutor issued an indictment. The applicant was obliged not to leave the place of his permanent residence. 7.  On 14 November 1997 the Prosecutor brought against the applicant an additional charge for abuse of power (Article 165 of the Criminal Code of 1960). 8.  On 8 December 1997 the case was assigned to the Tsentralny District Court of Simferopol (hereinafter “the District Court”). 9.  On 18 September 1998 the District Court, following the request of the applicant's representative, remitted the case for additional investigation. 10.  On 2 November 1998 the Prosecutor issued a new indictment under Articles 135 and 165 of the Criminal Code. 11.  On 30 November 1998 the proceedings were resumed before the District Court. 12.  On 30 August 1999 the District Court, upon its own initiative, remitted the case for additional investigation. 13.  On 1 October 1999 the Higher Court of the Crimea, following the protest of the Deputy Public Prosecutor of the Crimea, quashed this ruling and remitted the case to the first instance court. 14.  On 11 November 1999 the proceedings were resumed before the District Court. 15.  On 6 January 2000 the District Court, following the request of the applicant's representative, ordered a forensic medical examination of Mrs K., a victim in the case. 16.  On 10 July 2000 the Crimea Medical Forensic Centre returned the case-file without conducting the examination prescribed as Mrs K. refused to appear before the medical commission. 17.  On 15 September 2000 the District Court, following the request of the applicant's representative, ordered an additional forensic medical examination in the case. 18.  On 24 November 2000 the case-file, together with an expert statement, was returned to the District Court. 19.  On 16 March 2001 the District Court acquitted the applicant. 20.  On 29 May 2001 the Higher Court of the Crimea returned the case-file to the District Court as the cassation appeal of Mrs K. had not been served upon the other parties to the proceedings and the cassation appeal of the Prosecutor did not comply with the procedural formalities. 21.  On 14 August 2001 the proceedings were resumed before the Court of Appeal of the Crimea (former the Higher Court of the Crimea, hereinafter “the Court of Appeal”). 22.  On 22 January 2002 the Court of Appeal quashed the decision of 16 March 2001 and sentenced the applicant to two years of correctional work for abuse of power (Article 271 of the Criminal Code of 2001). 23.  On 4 April 2002 the Supreme Court, upon the applicant's cassation appeal, quashed the decision of 22 January 2002 and remitted the case for a fresh consideration by the court of appeal. 24.  On 11 June 2002 the Court of Appeal, upon its own initiative, ordered a forensic technical examination in the case. 25.  On 5 August 2002 the proceedings were resumed before the Court of Appeal. 26.  On 17 September 2002 the Court of Appeal quashed the decision of 16 March 2001 of the District Court and remitted the case for a fresh consideration by the first instance court. 27.  On 25 November 2003 the District Court sentenced the applicant to one year of correctional labour for abuse of power, suspended under the statute of limitation. The applicant did not appeal against this decision, which became final on 10 December 2003.