5.  The applicant was born in 1974 and lives in Moscow. 6.  According to the applicant, on 19 July 2010 he arrived in Moscow from Uzbekistan with a view to finding a seasonal job and marrying. He soon learnt that his brothers had been arrested and charged with participation in an extremist religious organisation. He also learnt that he was suspected by the Uzbekistani authorities of having founded an extremist religious organisation himself. 7.  On 18 October 2010 the applicant lodged a request with the Moscow Division of the Federal Migration Service (the FMS) seeking refugee status in Russia. On 21 January 2011 the FMS refused to grant refugee status to the applicant. The applicant appealed. 8.  On 14 April 2011 the FMS quashed the decision of 21 January 2011 and remitted the matter for fresh consideration to its division in Moscow. 9.  On 6 July 2011 the FMS refused by a de novo decision to grant the applicant refugee status. The applicant appealed. It appears that the appeal proceedings are still pending. 10.  On 16 September 2010 the Bukhara Town Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan ordered the applicant’s arrest pending the criminal investigation against him. 11.  On 3 February 2011 the applicant was arrested at the FMS’s office where he had gone to receive the copy of the decision in his case. The Moscow police informed the Uzbekistani authorities of the applicant’s arrest. On the same day they received a copy of the arrest order of 16 September 2010 and documents confirming that the applicant had been put on the wanted persons’ list. 12.  On 4 February 2011 the Izmailovskiy District Court of Moscow authorised the applicant’s detention pending extradition. The applicant was also advised of his right to appeal against the extension of his detention within three days of the adoption of the relevant decision. In particular, the court noted as follows:
“Having heard the parties to the proceedings, and having studied the extradition materials submitted in respect of [the applicant], the court finds that the [prosecutor’s] request should be granted. The court has established that [the applicant’s] detention is lawful and justified under international treaties and the Russian Code of Criminal Procedure. [The applicant’s] name is on the wanted persons’ list in connection with a crime he committed in the Republic of Uzbekistan. He has not been recognised as a refugee. Nor have any other circumstances preventing [the applicant’s] extradition been identified.
The court has received a decision by the Bukhara Town Court dated 16 September 2010 authorising the [applicant’s] remand in custody which mentions that [the applicant] has absconded.
Regard being had to the fact that the documents submitted to the court are in compliance with the requirements set forth in the rules of criminal procedure, the court finds that the [prosecutor’s] request should be granted. In view of the evidence submitted (the documents from the Republic of Uzbekistan) confirming that [the applicant] was charged with serious offences ... that his name was on the wanted persons’ list and that he had been remanded in custody, the court believes that if released, [the applicant] might continue his criminal activities or abscond, or otherwise interfere with administration of justice.” 13.  On 5 February 2011 the applicant lodged an appeal against the decision of 4 February 2011. He addressed it to the Moscow City Court, which received it on 21 February 2011. On 22 February 2011 the City Court forwarded the applicant’s appeal to the District Court for processing. The District Court received the appeal statement on 28 February 2011. On 1 March 2011 the District Court fixed the appeal hearing for 16 March 2011 and informed the applicant and his counsel accordingly. 14.  On 11 March 2011 the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Uzbekistan requested the applicant’s extradition. 15.  On 16 March 2011 the Moscow City Court upheld the decision of 4 February 2011 on appeal. 16.  On 24 March 2011 the District Court extended the applicant’s detention until 3 August 2011, noting as follows:
“[The applicant’s] detention should be extended given that he is charged with [serious offences] committed on the territory of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
These offences ... carry a custodial sentence exceeding one year. [The applicant] is not a refugee. There are no circumstances preventing his extradition [to Uzbekistan].
Regard being had to the above, the court finds that the request should be granted given that the information in respect of the [applicant’s] character leads the court to consider that, if released, he might abscond or interfere with the establishment of the truth.
The court takes into account that the applicant’s remand in custody was lawful and justified. There are no new circumstances in favour of its change or annulment.” 17.  On 3 August 2011 the Izmailovskiy Inter-District Prosecutor ordered the applicant’s release on account of the expiry of the maximum period of detention pending extradition and under his undertaking not to abscond. On the same day he was arrested for his alleged failure to comply with the administrative rules governing residence of foreigners in Russia. 18.  On 17 August 2011 the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation gave a decision refusing to extradite the applicant to Uzbekistan. 19.  On 5 August 2011 the District Court found the applicant’s stay in Russia to be in contravention of the Russian Administrative Code and ordered his expulsion. The applicant was to remain in custody pending the execution of the judgment. The applicant appealed. 20.  On 14 September 2011 the City Court quashed the decision of 5 August 2011 and ordered the applicant’s release.