5.  The applicant was born in 1982 and is currently detained in Gdańsk Remand Centre. 6.  On 24 November 2002 the applicant, who since 28 August 2002 had been sought under a wanted notice, was arrested and remanded in custody on suspicion that he had committed murder with three accomplices. 7.  The applicant’s pre-trial detention was subsequently extended by decisions of the Gdańsk Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) of 26 November 2002 and 6 February, 8 May, 29 July, and 18 November 2003. 8.  The domestic court justified the applicant’s pre‑trial detention by the existence of strong evidence against him and the likelihood that a severe penalty would be imposed in the case. The court also noted that it was necessary to carry out further investigations, such as obtaining evidence from new witnesses, psychiatric reports on the suspects and various forensic reports. 9.  Meanwhile, on 14 July 2003 the applicant was indicted on charges of robbery, manslaughter, distribution of drugs, assault and battery. There were three other defendants in the applicant’s case. The prosecutor asked the trial court to examine sixty-four witnesses and to read out the testimonies of another five witnesses. 10.  On 15 October 2003 the trial court decided that certain procedural shortcomings had occurred in the proceedings and returned the bill of indictment to the prosecutor. On 27 October 2003 a rectified bill of indictment was filed with the court. 11.  The first hearing in the applicant’s case took place on 28 November 2003. Subsequently, seventeen hearings were held by the trial court. One hearing was adjourned due to the absence of defendants. 12.  Between 2 and 12 June 2004 the applicant was serving a prison sentence imposed by the Gdańsk District Court in a separate case. 13.  On 8 October 2004 the Gdańsk Regional Court convicted the applicant on several counts and sentenced him to fifteen years’ imprisonment. 14.  Pending appeal, the applicant’s detention was extended by decisions of the Gdańsk Regional Court of 23 November 2004 and of the Gdańsk Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) of 19 April and 20 July 2005. 15.  The courts reiterated that there was strong evidence against the applicant and the likelihood that a severe penalty would be imposed in the case. In addition, the authorities noted that for the above reasons the applicable law allowed for a presumption of risk that the applicant would obstruct the proper course of the proceedings and the latter could only be ensured by applying the preventive measure in question. 16.  Meanwhile, on 22 June 2005 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal partly quashed the judgment and remitted the case to the Regional Court in that part. The first-instance judgment was upheld, however, with respect to a few offences and in that connection the applicant was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. The court deducted from the imposed sentence the term of the applicant’s detention preceding the conviction, namely two years, six months and eighteen days comprising two periods: from 24 November 2002 to 2 June 2004 and from 12 June 2004 to 22 June 2005. 17.  Subsequently, the applicant’s detention was extended by the decision of the Gdańsk Court of Appeal of 20 July 2005 and then, by decisions of the Gdańsk Regional Court of 25 October 2005, 21 February and 21 September 2006 (upheld on 11 October 2006 by the Gdańsk Court of Appeal), 30 November 2006, 22 February 2007 (upheld on 6 March 2007), 22 May 2007 (upheld on 5 June 2007), 24 August and 30 October 2007. 18.  The authorities continued to briefly reiterate the reasons previously given to justify the applicant’s detention. In decisions of 6 March and 5 June 2007 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal elaborated in greater detail on the reasons for continuing to apply the measure in question. The court noted that the decision to impose pre-trial detention in connection with a criminal case involving several co-defendants was taken in the light of the circumstances of the case vis-à-vis the position of each individual defendant. Thus, the fact that, in the instant case, a few of the applicant’s co-defendants had been released pending trial did not have any bearing on the applicant’s situation. Similarly, the court observed that the argument that there was strong evidence against the applicant, which had been relied on to justify the preventive measure, did not undermine the principle of the presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings. Finally, the court admitted that the applicant’s detention had been lengthy; however, its length was considered proportionate to the penalty envisaged under domestic law for the offences with which he had been charged. 19.  Meanwhile, on 1 August 2006 and 12 April 2007 the Gdańsk Regional Court refused the applicant’s request to have his detention lifted in view of his allegedly difficult family situation. 20.  The first hearing at the re-trial was held on 18 April 2006. Subsequently, the first-instance court held twenty and adjourned two hearings. 21.  In the meantime, namely from 16 June 2006 to 29 May 2007 the applicant was serving a prison sentence imposed by the Ostrów Wielkopolski District Court in a separate case. 22.  On 30 November 2007 the Gdańsk Regional Court convicted the applicant of three offences and sentenced him to thirteen years’ imprisonment. The court deducted from the imposed sentence the term of the applicant’s detention from 3 December 2005 and 26 June 2006, which added up to six months and twenty-two days. 23.  On 19 June 2008 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal quashed the above judgment, inter alia, in the part concerning two charges against the applicant and remitted the case to the Regional Court in that part. The first‑instance judgment was upheld, however, with respect to one offence and in that connection the applicant was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment. The appellate court deducted from the imposed sentence the term of the applicant’s detention preceding the conviction, namely one year, seven months and two days comprising two periods: from 3 December 2005 until 16 June 2006 and from 29 May 2007 until 19 June 2008. It is unclear on which date the applicant finished serving the remainder of his prison sentence.
The applicant’s criminal case is currently pending before the first‑instance court and he remains in detention by virtue of subsequent court decisions. 24.  On 1 August 2007 the applicant lodged a complaint about the unreasonable length of proceedings under the Act of 17 June 2004 on complaints about a breach of the right to a trial within a reasonable time (Ustawa o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki) (“the 2004 Act”). The applicant submitted that his criminal case had been pending before the Gdańsk Regional Court for too long. 25.  On 20 September 2007 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal rejected the application on the ground that the applicant had not complied with the procedural requirements, namely that he had failed to indicate the circumstances of the case which would justify his claim.