4.  The applicant is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1977 and lives in the city of Kharkiv, Ukraine. 5.  On 1 January 1996 the applicant was wounded by a police officer when the police officers were pursuing the applicant’s car. The applicant states that he was brought to hospital where he stayed until 4 January 1996. According to the applicant, in the hospital he was handcuffed to the bed and guarded. On 4 January 1996 the applicant was brought to the police station and later released. On 29 February 1996 the applicant was again arrested. On 27 May 1996 the Leninskiy District Court of Kharkiv sentenced the applicant to five and a half years’ imprisonment for robbery and hooliganism. The applicant’s imprisonment was to be calculated from 29 February 1996. On 13 August 1996 the Kharkiv Regional Court upheld the applicant’s sentence. 6.  In 2006 the applicant instituted proceedings in the Pecherskiy District Court against the State of Ukraine claiming compensation for damage inflicted to him by the above events. His claims were rejected on 1 February 2006 for the failure to comply with procedural requirements. The applicant’s appeal against this decision was rejected on 16 October 2006 by the Kyiv City Court of Appeal. On 14 November 2006 the Supreme Court of Ukraine upheld this decision. 7.  According to the applicant, at 7:00 a.m. on 24 May 2002 he was apprehended in his apartment and brought to the police station. There he was allegedly beaten by the police and forced to confess to having committed a crime. 8.  It is mentioned in the applicant’s custody record (протокол затримання) that the applicant was apprehended at 1:40 p.m. on 24 May 2002 after having committed a robbery of A. on the previous day. The applicant’s arrest was aimed to prevent his escape. It appears from the case-file materials that the applicant worked in the company allegedly owned or directed by A. and A.’s wife had heard that three persons who attacked and robbed her had called the applicant and said that they “had already arrived to the spot”. 9.  On 24 and 27 May 2002 the applicant refused to testify and requested a lawyer. 10.  On 27 May 2002 the applicant was charged with robbery. On the same day the Oktyabrsky District Prosecutor requested the court to place the applicant in pre-trial detention since the applicant had been previously convicted, had again committed a serious crime and could escape. The Oktyabrsky District Court, reiterating the grounds mentioned by the prosecutor, ordered the applicant’s detention until 2 June 2002. 11.  The applicant states that during one week after his arrest he was beaten and tortured. In particular, some police officers came to the SIZO on 29 May 2002 and again ill-treated the applicant. 12.  On 30 May 2002 lawyer B. was allowed to participate in the proceedings as the applicant’s representative. 13.  On 31 May 2002 the Oktyabrsky District Court extended the applicant’s detention to 7 June 2002 in order to collect information about the applicant and to decide on his further detention. 14.  On 5 June 2002 the same court authorised the applicant’s pre-trial detention. The court held that the applicant had been previously convicted in 1996 and he could obstruct justice and continue his criminal activity if released. On 12 June 2002 the Kharkiv Regional Court of Appeal upheld this decision. On 8 July 2002 the Kharkiv Regional Court of Appeal re‑considered the applicant’s appeal and again upheld the decision of 5 June 2002. 15.  On 17 July 2002 the Oktyabrsky District Court extended the applicant’s pre-trial detention to 24 September 2002. On 23 July 2002 the Kharkiv Regional Court of Appeal upheld this decision. The court referred to the seriousness of charges and “the scale of necessary investigation”, and noted that there were no grounds to release the applicant. 16.  On 13 September 2002 the Oktyabrsky District Court started consideration of the applicant’s criminal case. The court authorised the applicant’s further detention on remand.
On 26 June, 8 August and 6 November 2003, on 20 January, 26 March, 8 July and 2 December 2004, and on 2 February 2005, the Oktyabrsky District Court examined the applicant’s applications for release and rejected them on the grounds that the applicant had been previously convicted, was accused of a serious crime and there were no counter-indications to his detention in the conditions of the pre-trial detention centre (SIZO). 17.  On 10 March 2005 the Oktyabrsky District Court of Kharkiv sentenced the applicant to six years’ imprisonment on two counts of robbery. 18.  On 24 October 2006 the Kharkiv Regional Court of Appeal quashed this decision and remitted the case to a first instance court for fresh consideration. It further decided to leave the previously selected measure of restraint without changes. 19.  On 29 November 2006 the Supreme Court of Ukraine rejected the applicant’s request for leave to appeal against the above decisions. 20.  On 31 January, 7 and 15 February 2007 the Oktyabrsky District Court of Kharkiv rejected the applicant’s request for release referring to the seriousness of charges against him. 21.  On 26 February 2007 the Oktyabrsky District Court of Kharkiv sentenced the applicant together with his four accomplices to four years and ten months’ imprisonment on one count of robbery. The court also examined the applicant’s complaints about being ill-treated and found them to be unsubstantiated. The applicant did not appeal against this decision under the ordinary appeal procedure. 22.  On 24 March 2007 the applicant was released. 23.  On 21 May 2007 a judge of the Supreme Court of Ukraine rejected as unsubstantiated the applicant’s request for leave to appeal in cassation. 24.  On 14 August 2002 the Kharkiv Regional Prosecutor’s Office refused to institute criminal proceedings against the policemen following the applicant’s complaints. The police officers denied that they had ill-treated the applicant. The prosecutor further noted that the applicant had not requested any medical assistance at that time. 25.  In 2004 the applicant again complained to the prosecutor about ill-treatment by the police officers. On 22 July 2004 the Kharkiv Regional Prosecutor’s Office refused to institute criminal proceedings in connection with the applicant’s complaint. The prosecutor questioned police officers who denied the applicant’s allegations. There was also no medical evidence in support of the applicant’s complaints and it was not possible to examine the applicant since the events in question had happened two years ago. It was further mentioned that the applicant’s co-accused did not make any similar allegations. On 18 March 2005 the Chervonozavodskiy District Court rejected the applicant’s appeal against this decision. On 4 August 2005 the Kharkiv Regional Court of Appeal upheld the decision of 18 March 2005. On 24 February 2006 the Supreme Court of Ukraine rejected the applicant’s request for leave to appeal in cassation.