5.  The applicant was born in 1962 and lives in Hanover. She has been married to a German national since 1996. 6.  On 18 September 1992 an investigation was opened in Bulgaria against the applicant, who lived in Germany at that time, on suspicion that she had issued fraudulent cheques. On 28 September 1992 the applicant was charged in absentia and her pre-trial detention was ordered. A warrant for her arrest was issued and the proceedings were suspended. 7.  The applicant learned of the proceedings against her on an unspecified date in late 1995 during a telephone conversation with the Bulgarian prosecuting authorities. On 14 December 1995 she was arrested by the German police in connection with extradition proceedings opened against her. Later on she was released. On 13 March 1998 the German authorities decided to extradite her. On 5 October 1998 they invited her to appear before the Bulgarian authorities by 26 October 1998, which she did not do. On 12 December 1998 the applicant was extradited to Bulgaria and taken to Sliven prison. 8.  The criminal proceedings were resumed on 29 January 1999. On 17 May 1999 the applicant was charged again and questioned. 9.  On 9 July 1999 the Sofia district prosecutor terminated the criminal proceedings against the applicant, finding that the charges had not been proved. 10.  It appears that thereafter the applicant returned to Germany. 11.  On 11 October 2001 the Sofia city prosecutor quashed the decree of 9 July 1999 and remitted the case for further investigation. 12.  On 2 July 2002 the applicant travelled to Bulgaria and was arrested at Varna airport. The next day she was informed that the proceedings had been resumed and was questioned. She was released on bail on 11 July 2002. 13.  In the period from 3 December 2002 to 4 June 2004 the investigator proposed on two occasions that the criminal proceedings be discontinued but the Sofia city prosecutor ordered a further investigation and on the latter date sent the case to Sliven regional public prosecutor’s office. In a decree of 2 July 2004 the latter discontinued the criminal proceedings and referred the file to the Sofia district public prosecutor’s office. A jurisdiction dispute arose, which was settled on 9 November 2004 when Burgas appeals public prosecutor’s office quashed the decree of 2 July 2004 and held that the Sofia city public prosecutor’s office had authority to deal with the case. 14.  Meanwhile, on 14 October 2004 the applicant made a request under Article 239a of the Code of Criminal Procedure that the case against her be examined by a court. On 3 December 2004 the prosecuting authorities sent the file to the Sofia District Court. It appears that a jurisdiction dispute arose between the District Court and the Sofia City Court, which was settled on 7 February 2005. 15.  On 18 February 2005 the District Court invited the Sofia city prosecutor to indict the applicant within two months. It appears that this was done on an unspecified date in 2005. 16.  On 26 October 2007 the District Court terminated the proceedings against the applicant as time-barred. 17.  On 22 July 2002 the Sofia city prosecutor imposed a ban on the applicant’s leaving Bulgaria without permission. 18.  In 2002 the applicant made two requests to be allowed to visit Germany, which were dismissed by the Sofia city prosecutor on 27 September and 12 December 2002, respectively. 19.  On 13 May 2003 the applicant again requested to be allowed to travel to Germany, stating that her husband was ill. She submitted medical certificates. On 15 May 2003 the Sofia city prosecutor dismissed the request. He stated that the family reasons put forward by the applicant did not justify the temporary lifting of the travel ban. He further noted that the case was factually and legally complex and required further investigation. The prosecutor also considered that the risk of the applicant absconding could not be ruled out, noting the 1995-98 extradition proceedings. 20.  A subsequent request by the applicant was dismissed on 14 August 2003. The refusal was upheld by the City Court on 29 August 2003. 21.  On 10 December 2003 the applicant again requested to be allowed to visit Germany for a month in order to spend the festive season with her family. She argued that she had never obstructed the investigation. On 12 December 2003 the Sofia city prosecutor again dismissed her request. Following an appeal, on 31 December 2003 the City Court upheld the refusal, reasoning that there was a risk that the applicant would not return to Bulgaria, which would additionally delay the criminal proceedings. The court noted that the delays which had occurred between 1992 and 2001 had been exclusively due to the applicant’s behaviour. 22.  It appears that the applicant made another unsuccessful request for permission to travel on an unknown date in 2004. 23.  There is no information as to whether the applicant requested the lifting of the ban after 29 April 2006, when the Code of Criminal Procedure of 2005 came into force. The applicant states that the District Court allowed her to visit her family in Germany on two occasions after 8 August 2006. 24.  The prohibition on leaving the country was cancelled on 26 October 2007, when the criminal proceedings were terminated.