6.  The applicant was born in 1976 and lives in Volgograd. 7.  On 21 April 2003 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of aggravated murder. 8.  On 23 April 2003 the Elista Town Court of the Kalmykiya Republic formally remanded the applicant in custody, referring to the gravity of the charge and the risk that he might abscond or interfere with the investigation. 9.  On 12 June 2003 the Tsenteralniy District Court of Volgograd extended the applicant’s detention until 10 September 2003, referring to the gravity of the charges and the risk of his absconding, reoffending and interfering with the investigation. 10.  On 8 September 2003 the Tsenteralniy District Court extended the applicant’s detention until 10 December 2003, referring to the gravity of the charges and the complexity of the case. It stated that there was no reason to amend the preventive measure. 11.  On an unspecified date the applicant’s case was joined with the cases of five other persons, who had allegedly acted in conspiracy with the applicant. 12.  In October 2003 the applicant and his co-defendants were charged with organising an armed criminal gang, several counts of aggravated robbery, kidnapping, extortion, infliction of serious injuries and murder. 13.  On 4 December 2003 the Tsenteralniy District Court extended the applicant’s and a co-defendant’s detention until 10 April 2004, referring to the need for an additional investigation and the gravity of the charges. Moreover, the applicant had no permanent place of residence in Volgograd. The court found that there was a risk of the defendants’ absconding or re-offending. 14.  On 12 April 2004 the investigation was completed and six defendants, including the applicant, were committed for trial before the Volgograd Regional Court. 15.  The defendants asked for a trial by jury. 16.  On 20 April 2004 the Volgograd Regional Court fixed a preliminary hearing for 27 April 2004 to examine the request. It further held that the defendants should meanwhile remain in custody. 17.  On 27 April 2004 the Volgograd Regional Court ordered that the defendants be tried by jury and that they remain in custody pending trial. 18.  On 13 October 2004 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 January 2005, referring to the gravity of the charges. 19.  On 12 January 2005 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention, referring to the gravity of the charges and the risk that they might put pressure on witnesses and jurors. 20.  On 7 April 2005 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 July 2005. The Regional Court found that, in view of the gravity of the charges, it was “opportune” to keep the defendants in custody. It rejected their requests to release them under an undertaking not to leave the town, since it could not exclude the risk that they would put pressure on witnesses or jurors. 21.  On 29 June 2005 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 October 2005. It found that the defendants might interfere with the proceedings, as they were charged with serious criminal offences, including the charge of being members of an armed criminal gang. 22.  On 4 October 2005 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 January 2006 for the same reasons as before. 23.  The applicant appealed against the extension order of 4 October 2005. In his grounds of appeal he complained that the Regional Court’s conclusions that he could interfere with the investigation or abscond had been hypothetical and had not been supported by facts. He had a permanent place of residence, a minor daughter and elderly parents, and there was therefore no danger of his absconding. On 8 December 2005 the Supreme Court upheld the extension order on appeal, finding that it had been lawful and justified. 24.  On 22 December 2005 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 April 2006 for the same reasons as before. 25.  On 10 April and 5 July 2006 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention for the same reasons as before. 26.  On 2 October 2006 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 January 2007, referring to the gravity of the charges and the defendants’ “characters”. The court also indicated that the purpose of the detention was to eliminate any risk of the defendants’ absconding, re-offending or hampering the court proceedings. 27.  The applicant appealed, claiming that the Regional Court had used a stereotyped formula to justify his detention and that its conclusions that he might abscond, reoffend or interfere with the proceedings were not supported by relevant facts. He referred to his positive references and frail health and submitted that he had a minor child and elderly parents. He also complained that his detention had exceeded a reasonable time. 28.  On 28 December 2006 the Supreme Court upheld the extension order on appeal, finding that it had been lawful, well-reasoned and justified. The defendants were charged with serious criminal offences, and they might therefore abscond, re-offend or obstruct the proceedings. The allegedly excessive length of their detention, their poor health, minor children, elderly parents or permanent place of residence were not sufficient reasons to warrant release. 29.  On 27 December 2006 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 April 2007 for the same reasons as before. 30.  On 10 April 2007 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 July 2007 for the same reasons as before. 31.  On 9 July 2007 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 October 2007, finding that there was no reason to vary the preventive measure. 32.  On 11 October 2007 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 January 2008, referring to the gravity of the charges and the risk of absconding or intimidating the witnesses or jurors. 33.  On 9 January 2008 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 April 2008 for the same reasons as before. 34.  On 8 April 2008 the Volgograd Regional Court rejected the applicant’s request to be released under an undertaking not to leave the place of residence and extended the defendants’ detention until 12 July 2008. The decision reads as follows:
“As the trial has not yet been completed, it is necessary to extend the defendants’ detention.
The court considers that the gravity of the charges justifies applying to the defendants a preventive measure in the form of detention.
However, in addition to the gravity of the charges - namely the organisation of an armed gang ... and commission of assaults on citizens and murders - carrying a sentence of up to twenty years’ imprisonment for each of the defendants, the court also takes into account other factors.
Thus, the court is entitled to believe that ... application to the defendants of an undertaking not to leave the town or other preventive measures will not exclude the possibility of their absconding or exercising pressure on participants to the proceedings and jurors.
The defendants’ argument that their detention has been excessively long is not in itself sufficient to warrant release.
The defendants have not produced any material showing the existence of factors making impossible [sic] their stay in detention facility conditions.
The court is not convinced by the defendants’ argument that they have not been granted access to the materials submitted by the prosecution in support of their requests for extension. The court has at its disposal only the materials from the criminal case file, which had been studied by the defendants.
The court considers that the grounds for the detention of the defendants, charged with serious and particularly serious criminal offences, are relevant and sufficient. Their detention serves the interest of society, as it prevents the commission of similar criminal offences and ensures high-quality and effective examination of the present criminal case.
The criminal case file contains sufficient evidence against each defendant justifying an extension of their detention...” 35.  On 7 July 2008 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendants’ detention until 12 October 2008, repeating verbatim the decision of 8 April 2008. 36.  On 10 October 2008 the Volgograd Regional Court extended the defendant’s detention until 12 January 2009, repeating verbatim the decision of 8 April 2008. 37.  The proceedings are still pending before the trial court.