4.  The applicant was born in 1975 and lives in Kraków, Poland. 5.  On 14 January 1998 the applicant was arrested by the police. On 16 January 1998 the Kraków District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) decided to detain the applicant on remand in view of the reasonable suspicion that he had committed offences of kidnapping, sequestration, attempted murder and theft. The court established that there was a risk that the applicant might tamper with evidence as he had attempted to intimidate the victim and that he might abscond since two other alleged perpetrators had gone into hiding. 6.  Between 27 March and 11 August 1998 the applicant served a prison sentence ordered in another set of criminal proceedings. 7.  On 6 April 1998 the Kraków Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki) prolonged the applicant’s detention relying on the reasonable suspicion that he had committed the offences in question and on the need to continue the investigation, in particular so that he could undergo a psychiatric examination. 8.  On 14 July and 27 October 1998 the applicant’s pre-trial detention was further prolonged. The latter decision was taken at a public hearing at which the applicant and his lawyers were present. The court found that keeping the applicant in custody was justified by the strong suspicion that he had committed the offences, the probability that a severe sentence would be imposed and the fact that the third alleged perpetrator was still in hiding. 9.  The applicant appealed against those decisions arguing that there was no evidence that once released he would obstruct the proper course of the proceedings or abscond. The applicant further asked the court to take into consideration his difficult family situation as his parents needed his support. 10.  In the meantime, on 13 July 1998, the applicant was indicted before the Kraków Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy). 11.  At a hearing held on 16 February 1999, at which the applicant was present, the Kraków Regional Court prolonged the applicant’s detention. The court found:
“The fact that [the applicant] has been charged with having committed attempted murder is a sufficient ground for imposing the most severe preventive measure, that is detention on remand.” 12.  Subsequently, on 14 May and 16 August 1999, the applicant’s detention on remand was prolonged by the trial court. The first decision was taken at a public hearing at which the applicant and his lawyers were present. The court relied on the strong probability that the applicant had committed the offences and the advanced stage of the trial. 13.  On several occasions the Kraków Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) dismissed the applicant’s requests to attend the court’s session at which his appeals against the decisions to prolong his pre-trial detention were examined. The court established that the presence of the applicant was not necessary as he was represented by two lawyers of his choice who could attend the court’s session. 14.  The applicant’s numerous applications for release and appeals against the decisions to prolong the detention were to no avail. 15.  In 1999 the trial court held in total thirteen hearings. 16.  On 10 January 2000 the Kraków Regional Court gave a judgment. The applicant was convicted as charged and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment. 17.  The applicant lodged an appeal. On 13 April 2000 the Kraków Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned judgment and remitted the case. The court further decided to prolong the applicant’s detention on remand. His lawyers were present at the hearing. 18.  On 27 July 2000 the trial court held the first hearing at which the applicant and his lawyers were present. The Regional Court prolonged the applicant’s detention justifying it with reference to the reasonable suspicion that he had committed offences in question and the severity of the anticipated penalty. The court dismissed the applicant’s argument that his detention was contrary to international treaties, in particular the European Convention on Human Rights. 19.  On 24 August 2000 the Kraków Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s request to attend the session at which his appeal against the decision of 27 July 2000 was to be examined, on the grounds that his presence was neither obligatory nor necessary. On the same date the court dismissed the appeal. It also dismissed the applicant’s requests to release him from detention and to apply another preventive measure instead, such as bail. The Court found that his family’s situation was not as difficult as the applicant had indicated. It further established that the severity of the anticipated penalty was a sufficient ground (“samodzielna przesłanka”) for his continued detention and was consistent with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. Nevertheless, the court decided to limit the period for which the detention was to be prolonged to 31 January 2001. The applicant’s lawyer was present at the session. 20.  Afterwards, the applicant’s detention was further prolonged at public hearings held on 22 November 2000 and 20 April, 13 June, 27 September and 13 December 2001. The applicant and his lawyers were present at these hearings. In the meantime, the court held a session on 23 February 2001 at which it prolonged the detention. One of the applicant’s lawyer was present. It appears that on each occasion the Regional Court repeated the grounds for detention given previously: the reasonable suspicion that the applicant had committed the offences and the severity of the penalty that might be imposed. The court further dismissed the applicant’s requests for release and found that the situation of his parents and his state of health were undoubtedly difficult but not “catastrophic”. The decisions were upheld on appeal by the Kraków Court of Appeal. 21.  The applicant’s numerous requests for release were to no avail. His applications and appeals against the decisions to prolong his detention were dismissed at court sessions. The applicant’s lawyers were present at most of those sessions. 22.  On 6 February 2002 the Kraków Regional Court gave judgment. The applicant was convicted as charged and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment. The applicant lodged an appeal against the judgment. 23.  On 19 September 2002 the Kraków Court of Appeal partly allowed the appeal. The applicant was acquitted of the charge of attempted murder and his sentence was reduced to five years’ imprisonment. 24.  Subsequently, the applicant’s court-appointed lawyer lodged on his behalf a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy). On 3 June 2003 the Supreme Court partly allowed the cassation appeal, quashed the appeal court’s judgment and remitted the case. 25.  On 24 June 2004 the Krakow Court of Appeal gave a judgment. The court amended its judgment of 19 September 2002 but it upheld the applicant’s sentence. The judgment became final.