4.  The applicant was born in 1964 and lives in Strzelce Krajeńskie, Poland. 5.  On 3 March 2000 the applicant was brought before the Radomsko District Court (Sąd Rejonowy). He was charged with having committed burglary. The court ordered that the applicant be remanded in custody until 1 June 2000. 6.  The applicant was placed in the Piotrków Trybunalski Detention Centre (Areszt Śledczy). His detention was subsequently prolonged several times until the end of the proceedings against him. 7.  On 15 November 2000 the Radomsko District Court convicted the applicant of handling stolen goods and sentenced him to 15 months’ imprisonment. 8.  On 2 February 2001 the Piotrków Trybunalski Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) upheld the first-instance judgment. 9.  On 28 May 2001 the applicant’s officially-appointed lawyer, who represented him in the proceedings before both instances, refused to lodge a cassation appeal on his behalf. 10.  The applicant sent numerous letters to the Court, most of which appear to have been opened and read by the domestic authorities. 11.  The applicant’s first letter of 1 May 2000 bears the stamp “Radomsko District Prosecutor (Prokuratura Rejonowa w Radomsku)”, the date 8 May 2000 (stamped), and an illegible signature. 12.  His letter of 27 August 2001 bears the same stamp, a signature “prok. R. Gawęcka (Prosecutor R. Gawęcka)”, and the date 28 August 2001, which is both stamped and hand-written. 13.  The applicant’s letter of 10 September 2001 is marked with the same stamp and the date 12 September 2001 (stamped and hand-written) and bears an illegible signature. 14.  The envelopes of the applicant’s letters of 14 and 22 October, 18 November 2001, 2 April, 3 and 22 July, 13 October, 4 December 2002 bear the stamp “Censored” (ocenzurowano) and the official stamp of the Radomsko District Court. Each of them is marked with a date-stamp and an illegible signature. All envelopes bear traces of opening after being sealed: they were cut open and resealed with adhesive tape. 15.  On 3 January 2003 the applicant sent a letter to the Court. He complained that his correspondence with the Court’s Registry had been censored. He enclosed the envelope of the letter sent to him by the Registry on 22 November 2002. The envelope was marked with the stamp “Censored”, the date 5 December 2002 and an illegible signature. The envelope of the applicant’s letter to the Court also bears the stamp “censored”, the date 10 January 2003 and an illegible signature. They have been covered up with white corrector fluid.