6.  The applicant was born in 1958 and lives in Tambov.
The applicant's arrest and pre-trial detention 7.  The applicant's father and Mrs K. co-owned a cottage in Tambov. The applicant's father decided to sell his share of the cottage and authorised the applicant to organise the sale. 8.  On 4 July 2001 Mrs K. was murdered. On the same date Mr Z., who had carried out certain repair works for the applicant, was arrested by the police and confessed to the murder. He told the police that the applicant had instigated the crime and promised him remuneration for the murder. On the same day the police conducted a search of the applicant's flat. 9.  The date and time of the applicant's arrest are disputed between the parties. According to the applicant, she was arrested at 6 p.m. on 4 July 2001. According to the Government, she was arrested at 2.40 a.m. on 5 July 2001, the time indicated in the arrest report drawn up by the investigator and signed by the applicant.
On 6 July 2001 the Prosecutor of the Oktyabrskiy District of Tambov authorised the applicant's pre-trial detention. The order stated as follows:
“[Taking into account] the gravity of the crime committed by [Mrs] Savenkova, and also the fact that at the present time there are insufficient grounds for bringing charges against her, the fact that she may abscond from the investigation and fail to appear at court, commit another crime or interfere with the establishment of the truth in the criminal case, [the investigator] has decided to choose with regard to [Mrs] Savenkova Tatyana Rafailovna ... detention in the Tambov SIZO-1 as a measure of restraint ...” 10.  On 13 July 2001 the applicant was charged with incitement to murder. 11.  On 6 August 2001 the applicant changed her legal counsel. 12.  On 9 August 2001 the applicant made an application for the measure of restraint to be changed to an undertaking not to leave her place of residence. She submitted that her second son, having been injured in an accident, was in hospital, and her younger daughter of three needed to be taken care of. 13.  On 22 August 2001 the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Tambov dismissed the application as follows:
“On 6 July 2001 a measure of restraint was chosen by the Prosecutor of the Oktyabrskiy District in respect of [Mrs] Savenkova.
[Mrs] Savenkova requests that the measure of restraint be changed as she is not guilty, has three children, and her son has been injured in an accident.
The measure of restraint was chosen lawfully and reasonably, and took into consideration the gravity of the charges.
Pursuant to Article 220-2 of the [RSFSR] Code of Criminal Procedure, [the court] has decided to dismiss the complaint.
This decision may be appealed against to the Tambov Regional Court within seven days.” 14.  The applicant did not appeal against the decision. 15.  On 29 August 2001 the acting Prosecutor of the Oktyabrskiy District of Tambov extended the applicant's pre-trial detention to 5 October 2001, referring to the gravity of charges as grounds. 16.  On 2 October 2001 the acting Deputy Prosecutor of the Tambov Region extended the applicant's pre-trial detention to 4 November 2001, referring to the gravity of charges and the risk of fleeing justice and obstructing the investigation. 17.  On 29 October 2001 the acting Deputy Prosecutor of the Tambov Region extended the applicant's pre-trial detention to 4 December 2001, referring to the gravity of the charges and the risk of fleeing justice and obstructing the investigation. 18.  On 4 December 2001 the criminal case file was submitted to the Tambov Regional Court for examination on the merits. 19.  On 10 December 2001 the applicant's counsel sent a telegram to the Tambov Regional Court requesting it to terminate the applicant's prosecution and release her from custody. 20.  On 19 December 2001 the Tambov Regional Court scheduled the first trial hearing to take place on 4 January 2004 and held that the preventive measure applied to the applicant, the detention in the Tambov SIZO-1, “should remain unchanged”. 21.  On 14 March 2002 the Tambov Regional Court found the applicant guilty of incitement to murder and sentenced her to eight years' imprisonment. Z. was found guilty of murder and sentenced to twelve years' imprisonment. 22.  On 14 June 2002 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation examined and dismissed an appeal by the applicant. The applicant and Z. were transferred to correctional facilities to serve their sentences. 23.  On 30 August 2002 the Deputy Prosecutor General, at the applicant's request, lodged an application for supervisory review of the judgment. 24.  On 23 October 2002 the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation granted the request for supervisory review, quashed the judgment on the grounds of inadequate legal assistance to Z., and remitted the case to the first-instance court for fresh examination. The Supreme Court ordered the applicant and Z. to remain in custody. 25.  On 13 November 2002 the case file was transferred to the Tambov Regional Court. On an unspecified date the applicant and Z. were transferred to the Tambov SIZO-1 and remained there awaiting the second trial. 26.  On 20 November 2002 the Tambov Regional Court conducted a hearing of the criminal case where the applicant allegedly challenged the detention order and requested to be released. She provided a copy of the application, signed by her counsel Kh., but claims that the court did not examine it. 27.  According to the applicant, on 9 December 2002 her lay representative, R., lodged another application with the Tambov Regional Court for the measure of restraint to be changed to an obligation not to leave her place of residence. According to the Government, this application was lodged on 20 January 2003. 28.  On 20 January 2003, before the hearing of her case by the Tambov Regional Court, the applicant's counsel Kh. made an application to the court challenging the applicant's continued pre-trial detention and requesting that the measure of restraint be changed to an undertaking not to leave her place of residence. The application was examined and dismissed by the Tambov Regional Court with reference to the gravity of the charges. 29.  On 9 April 2003 the Tambov Regional Court acquitted the applicant and Z. of all charges because of lack of evidence. They were released in the court room. The prosecutor appealed against the acquittal. 30.  On 9 June 2003 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation granted the prosecutor's appeal, reversed the judgment of 9 April 2003 and remitted the case for a fresh first-instance examination. 31.  On 19 February 2004 the Tambov Regional Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced her to eight years' imprisonment. Z. was sentenced to twelve years' imprisonment. They were taken into custody from the court room. 32.  On appeal, on 16 April 2004 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation upheld the judgment of 19 February 2004 in substance, but reduced the applicant's sentence to five years' imprisonment and Z.'s sentence to nine years' imprisonment. 33.  On 14 January 2005 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation granted the applicant's request for the suspension of her imprisonment and she was released.