5.  The applicant was born in 1979 and lives in Przemyśl. 6.  In 1998 the applicant was charged with assaulting a certain A.B. On an unknown date criminal proceedings against him were instituted. 7.  In January 2004 the applicant left Poland for Ukraine. Before leaving, he informed the court that he could be contacted at a correspondence address in Przemyśl. He also telephoned the court several times to ask about progress on his case. He was informed that the proceedings had been stayed. 8.  In March 2004 he started working in Lviv, Ukraine. In June 2004 his residence registration was extended until 20 May 2005 and at the same time the applicant was reprimanded by the administrative court for submitting his registration documents late. 9.  Meanwhile, on 12 February 2004 Szczecin District Court in Poland remanded the applicant in custody for three months for failure to comply with a summons. 10.  At around 11 a.m. on 20 January 2005 the applicant went to a police station in Lviv to report that his friend’s car had been stolen. The police checked his passport, verified his personal details and locked him up in a cell. When he asked for the reasons for his arrest he was told that he was an “international thief”. He was subsequently questioned by officers. The applicant submits that during the questioning the officers severely beat him and extinguished cigarettes and matches on his wrist and forearm. He further maintains that he was not given any food or drink for four days. 11.  On 24 January 2005 a decision of the Ukrainian police of 21 January 2005 to expel him from the country was served on him. The decision stated that the applicant had arrived in Ukraine for private purposes in March 2004 and held a residence permit, valid until 20 May 2005. It further mentioned that on 20 January 2005 the Lviv police received a cable to the effect that the applicant was wanted by the Polish law-enforcement authorities on a charge of theft. On those grounds and in accordance with section 32 of Ukraine Law “on the Legal Status of Foreigners and Stateless Persons”, it was decided to expel the applicant from Ukraine with a three-year ban on re-entry. 12.  The applicant was kept at the police station until the afternoon of 24 January 2005, when he was transported to the Polish border control post in Medyka, where he arrived at around 7 p.m. He was arrested there by the Polish police on the basis of the detention order of 12 February 2004 and a wanted notice issued by the Szczecin police station on 2 August 2004. He was then transferred to the Przemyśl Detention Centre in Poland. 13.  At 8.20 p.m. on 24 January 2005 the applicant was examined by a doctor in an emergency centre for cigarette burns on his left hand and prescribed treatment. 14.  On 31 January 2005 the applicant was examined by a prison doctor, who stated that the applicant had two 0.5 cm cigarette burns on his left hand, plus two similar marks on his left wrist and one on his forearm. He also had abrasions on his upper and lower lip and a broken front tooth. 15.  On 9 March 2005 the applicant complained to the Przemyśl District Prosecutor that he had been ill-treated in police custody in Lviv on 20 January 2005. He submitted that he had been severely beaten by the Ukrainian police. He further claimed that they had stolen 5,000 euros (EUR), 200 United States dollars (USD) and 100 Ukrainian hryvnias (UAH) from him. 16.  On 31 August 2005 the Przemyśl Regional Prosecutor’s Office sent the investigation materials relating to the applicant’s allegations to the Lviv Regional Prosecutor’s Office. 17.  On 22 June 2005 the applicant lodged a claim for compensation with the Przemyśl Regional Court against the Ukrainian police. On 28 June 2005 the court rejected his statement of claim as inadmissible in law for lack of jurisdiction. 18.  By letter of 5 June 2006, in reply to the applicant’s query, the Przemyśl Regional Prosecutor’s Office stated that they had received no information from the Lviv Prosecutor’s Office. 19.  The applicant submitted that despite several phone calls and queries from him, the Lviv Prosecutor’s Office had not informed him of any progress with the investigation.