PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 25413/04) against the Republic of Poland lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Polish national, Mr Tomasz Hołowczak (“the applicant”), on 15 June 2004.

The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

On 8 March 2007 the President of the Fourth Section of the Court decided to give notice of the application to the Government. Under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it was decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1967 and lives in Czarne.

A. The applicant’s pre-trial detention

On 11 February 1998 the applicant was arrested by the police on suspicion of murder, involvement in drug trafficking and illegal possession of a firearm. On 13 February 1998 the Kołobrzeg District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) remanded him in custody in view of the reasonable suspicion that he had committed the offences in question and having regard to their seriousness. It further considered that there was a risk that he would obstruct the proper conduct of the investigation and influence witnesses and other members of the criminal group to which he belonged.

In the course of the investigation, the applicant’s detention was extended several times.

On 4 August 1998 the applicant was indicted before the Koszalin Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy). As the bill of indictment did not meet the formal requirements a second bill of indictment was served on 22 August 1998. The bill of indictment comprised charges of murder, drug trafficking and illegal possession of a firearm and concerned four accused.

From 13 November 1998 until 2 January 1999 the applicant served a prison sentence imposed on him in other criminal proceedings.

From 17 February 1999 to 10 August 1999 the court held eight hearings during which it heard evidence from sixty-six witnesses, as the applicant and the co-accused asked for all the witnesses to be heard during the hearing and for their testimony not merely to be read from the investigation file.

The hearings scheduled for 10 September 1999 and 12 October 1999 were postponed due to the illness of a lay judge (ławnik) and the absence of one of the lawyers.

On 13 October 1999 the court decided to hear the case from the beginning because of the inability of the lay judge to continue to sit in the case. From 13 October 1999 to 13 January 2000 the court held thirteen hearings. In a number of hearings witnesses failed to appear.

On 13 January 2000 the court convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to life imprisonment and forfeiture of his civic rights. He appealed.

On 28 March 2001 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) quashed the judgment and remitted the case to the Kołobrzeg District Procurator (Prokurator Rejonowy) for further investigation.

On 14 October 2002 a new bill of indictment was lodged. It comprised the above-mentioned charges.

The Koszalin Regional Court proceedings were reopened on 10 December 2002.

On 28 April 2003 the Koszalin Regional Court extended the applicant’s detention until 31 July 2003. It relied on the reasonable suspicion that the applicant had committed the offence with which he had been charged, which was supported by evidence from witnesses and experts. The court further considered that the need to secure the proper conduct of the investigation justified holding him in custody. It referred to the likelihood of a severe sentence of imprisonment being imposed on the applicant. It also relied on the risk that the applicant might tamper with evidence. It referred to the attempt by the applicant and one of the co-defendants to influence the process of taking evidence.

From 14 January 2003 to 31 May 2004 the court held thirty-eight hearings and evidence from one hundred and forty-three witnesses was obtained. When witnesses failed to appear, the court imposed fines on them.

During the proceedings the applicant’s detention was extended on several occasions. The court repeated the grounds given in the previous decisions.

It appears that in the course of the proceedings the applicant made unsuccessful applications for release and appealed, likewise unsuccessfully, against refusals to release him and against decisions extending his detention.

On 31 May 2004 the Regional Court convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to life imprisonment. He appealed. The applicant’s detention was subsequently extended on several occasions.

On 1 July 2005 the Szczecin Court of Appeal upheld the judgment.

The applicant lodged a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy). On 6 November 2006 the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.

B. The proceedings concerning a breach of the right to a trial within a reasonable time

On 31 March 2005 the applicant lodged a complaint with the Szczecin Court of Appeal under section 5 of the Law 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 sought a ruling declaring that the length of the proceedings before the Koszalin Regional Court had been excessive and an award of compensation in the amount of 10,000 Polish zlotys.

On 18 May 2005 the Court of Appeal dismissed his complaint. The court observed that even though the case had been pending for seven years, its length could not be considered unreasonable. It examined the course of the impugned proceedings and held that there were no delays for which the Regional Court could be held responsible. The hearings had been held on a regular basis and evidence from over 100 witnesses and several experts had been obtained. It referred to the case’s extreme complexity, involving a large number of individuals and complicated evidentiary proceedings, as the main cause of the length of the proceedings.