5.  The applicant was born in 1942 and lives in Sukhodolsk. 6.  The applicant worked as a foreman in the Barkov Mine in the Lugansk region. 7.  On 11 March 2000 an explosion in the mine caused the death of eighty miners. Another seven individuals, including the applicant, sustained injuries. As a result of those injuries the applicant's sight and hearing were impaired, and the condition gradually developed to the stage of complete blindness and deafness. 8.  On 17 August 2000 the applicant and four other officials of the mine, who were responsible for the observance of work safety regulations, were charged with negligence. 9.  On 6 July 2001 the Krasnodon City Court found the applicant guilty of negligence and sentenced him to four years' imprisonment. 10.  On 18 September 2001 the Lugansk Regional Court of Appeal upheld the judgment of the first-instance court with minor amendments. 11.  On 1 August 2002 the Supreme Court of Ukraine quashed the decisions of the lower courts, considering the punishment too lenient, and remitted the case for fresh consideration. 12.  In November 2002 the new hearing started in the first-instance court. 13.  During this new examination of the case the applicant's lawyer and representative submitted a request for the severance of the criminal proceedings against the applicant due to a violation of his right to a defence at the initial stage of the investigation, when he was not legally represented although such representation was obligatory due to his disabilities. On 13 May 2003 the court allowed this request and remitted the criminal case against the applicant for a new pre-trial investigation. 14.  On 14 August 2003 the applicant was once again charged with negligence. 15.  In November 2003 the Krasnodon City Court ordered two forensic examinations to assess the applicant's sanity, his ability to understand the ongoing events and to participate in the pre-trial investigation and the trial itself. 16.  The forensic examinations conducted in February and June 2004 established the partial insanity of the applicant and his inability to understand the ongoing events and to participate in the proceedings. 17.  On 22 June 2004 the Krasnodon City Court discharged the applicant from criminal liability due to changed circumstances, brought about by his state of health, and to the fact that he was not a danger to society. 18.  The applicant's representative appealed against this decision, considering that the criminal case should be terminated on exonerative grounds. 19.  On 26 October 2004 the Lugansk Regional Court of Appeal quashed the judgment of 22 June 2004 and remitted the case for fresh consideration. 20.  On 15 March 2005 the Krasnodon Court referred the case for additional investigation. 21.  On 30 August 2005 the Lugansk Regional Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the first-instance court. 22.  On 3 November 2005 the pre-trial investigation in the case against the applicant was suspended due to the serious illness of the accused in accordance with Article 206 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 23.  On 8 February 2008 the proceedings were resumed. 24.  On 13 February 2008 the investigator questioned an expert and on 15 February 2008 the proceedings were suspended again. 25.  On 12 January 2009 the investigator reopened the proceedings and ordered an additional forensic medical examination of the applicant. The examination, conducted between 16 and 21 January 2009, confirmed the complete blindness and deafness of the applicant and concluded that he would not recover. 26.  On 21 February 2009 the proceedings were suspended again. 27.  On 15 October 2001 the applicant instituted proceedings in the Krasnodon City Court against the Barkov mine, seeking compensation for damage as a result of the accident and subsistence payments. 28.  On 22 January 2002 the court rejected the applicant's claim. This decision was not appealed against and became final. 29.  On 20 February 2003 the applicant requested the same court to review this civil case in the light of newly discovered circumstances. 30.  On 10 April 2003, upon the defendant's request, the court suspended the review proceedings due to the pending criminal proceedings. 31.  On 24 November 2006 the Krasnodon City Court refused to reopen the proceedings in the light of newly discovered circumstances, having found that there were no such circumstances in the case.