4.  The applicant was born in 1937 and lives in Baj, Hungary. 5.  On 2 October 1992 the Komárom-Esztergom County Regional Police Department informed the applicant, the managing director of a limited liability company (“the company”), that a criminal investigation had been opened against him on charges of fraud. 6.  On 6 October 1992 the Police Department requested the Tax Authority’s Komárom-Esztergom County Department to carry out a tax inspection of the company. Subsequently, on 13 October 1992 the criminal investigation against the applicant was suspended pending the outcome of the tax inspection. 7.  On 4 January 1993 the Tax Authority informed the Police Department of its findings. Consequently, on 8 January 1993 the Police Department ordered that the criminal investigation against the applicant be continued. 8.  During the period until 14 December 1993, the Police Department questioned several witnesses on altogether fifteen occasions and interrogated the applicant on 24 August and 16 December 1993. On the latter date he refused to give testimony. 9.  On 17 December 1993 the Police Department appointed an expert graphologist. 10.  On 23 December 1993 the Police Department informed the applicant’s lawyer and the Tata District Public Prosecutor’s Office of the results of the investigation. On 27 December 1993 the Police Department terminated the investigations and transferred the file to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. 11.  On 7 February 1994 the Public Prosecutor’s Office preferred a bill of indictment. 12.  The applicant’s request of 26 April 1995 to have the investigation re-opened was rejected by the Tata District Court. 13.  The first trial hearing took place on 12 April 1996. On this occasion the District Court heard several witnesses. The applicant refused to testify and stated that he did not commit the crime with which he was charged. 14.  On 15 April 1996 the District Court enquired of a witness who had failed to appear at the hearing of 12 April due to illness as to the expected date of his recovery. 15.  On the applicant’s motion for bias of 10 June 1996, the presiding judge withdrew from the case. 16.  On 30 October 1996 the President of the District Court appointed another judge. On 16 December 1996 the President of the District Court together with two other judges declared bias. 17.  On 29 April 1997 the Komárom-Esztergom County Regional Court appointed the Tatabánya District Court to deal with the case. 18.  On 27 April 1999 the Tatabánya District Court held a hearing and acquitted the applicant. 19.  On the appeal of the Prosecutor’s Office, on 11 and 25 January and 22 February 2000 the Regional Court held hearings. 20.  On 14 March 2000 the Regional Court upheld the first-instance judgment, which thereby became final.