PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 22807/07) 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 Jerzy Biśta (“the applicant”), on 29 May 2007.

The applicant was represented by Mr M. Konieczyński, a lawyer practising in Katowice. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

On 21 April 2008 the President of the Fourth Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1954 and lives in Trzebinia.

A. Criminal proceedings against the applicant and his detention on remand

On 9 August 2005 the applicant was arrested by officers of the Internal Security Agency (Agencja Bezpieczeństwa Wewnętrznego) on suspicion of revealing State secrets and bribery. As submitted by the applicant, the officers had handcuffed and beaten him. He was taken to the Internal Security Agency and subsequently to the Kraków District Prosecutor’s Office where he was again beaten and urged to confess. At the same time another group of armed officers had broken into his apartment and handcuffed and terrorised his wife. Their apartment was ransacked during the search for documents and other evidence.

On 11 August 2005 the Kraków District Court remanded him in custody, relying on the reasonable suspicion that he had committed the offences in question. It also considered that it was necessary to keep the applicant in detention in order to secure the proper conduct of the proceedings, given the risk that he might tamper with evidence or induce witnesses to give false testimony. The court also stressed the severity of the likely sentence to be imposed and the complexity of the case. The court found that there was a reasonable suspicion that the applicant, while at liberty, would have had unlimited opportunities to contact other persons who were directly linked to his criminal activities. In particular, the court considered that the applicant had presumably been acting with accomplices.

An appeal by the applicant against the detention order was dismissed on 8 September 2005 by the Kraków Regional Court.

In the course of the investigation, the applicant’s detention was prolonged on several occasions, inter alia on 7 November and 29 December 2005 by the Szczecin District Court, on 17 March and 12 September 2006 by the Szczecin Regional Court, on 19 February and 27 April 2007 by the Szczecin Regional Court and on 4 July 2007 by the Szczecin Court of Appeal (until 15 October 2007). In all their decisions regarding detention the authorities repeatedly relied on the original grounds given for the applicant’s detention. In addition, they considered that the need to secure the proper conduct of the proceedings, especially in view of the considerable number of witnesses to be heard and confronted, as well as the extensive body of evidence to be examined, justified holding him in custody.

Numerous appeals by the applicant against decisions prolonging his detention and all his subsequent applications for release were unsuccessful.

On 20 December 2005 the Szczecin Regional Prosecutor filed a bill of indictment against the applicant and twelve other co-accused. The applicant was charged with revealing state secrets and bribery. One hundred and four persons were listed to be examined as witnesses.

On 12 January 2006 a request to transfer the case to the Szczecin Regional Court was filed owing to the special nature of charges brought against the applicant, including, inter alia, revealing State secrets and involvement in the case of high-ranking police officers. On 27 January 2006 the request was granted by the Szczecin Court of Appeal.

On 3 October 2007 the Szczecin Court of Appeal decided not to allow the Szczecin Regional Court’s request for a further extension of the applicant’s detention. It ordered the imposition of another preventive measure. The court held that even if grounds for the initial detention of the applicant still remained valid, they no longer sufficed to justify extending it further beyond the permissible period of two years. Such lengthy prolongation of his detention would change it into an actual sentence and was contrary to the aim of Article 258 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Lastly, the court stressed that the risk that the accused might influence the outcome of the evidentiary proceedings had ceased to exist.

On 11 October 2007 the Szczecin Regional Court lifted the detention order. No other preventive measure was ordered. The Kraków Appeal Prosecutor appealed.

On 24 October 2007 the Szczecin Court of Appeal quashed the decision of 11 October 2007 and remitted the case for reconsideration in respect of the need for applying preventive measures.

On 6 November 2007 the Szczecin Regional Court decided that the applicant could be released if he put up bail of 50,000 Polish zlotys (PLN). In addition, an order was given to seize his passport and he was placed under police supervision.

The applicant appealed and requested that the amount of bail be reduced.

On 5 December 2007 the Szczecin Court of Appeal allowed his request and set bail at PLN 20,000, to be deposited before 12 December 2007.

It appears that the applicant was eventually released on payment of the bail, at the latest on 15 December 2007. It further appears that the criminal proceedings are currently pending.

B. Censorship of the applicant’s correspondence

On 22 October 2007 the applicant received a letter from the Szczecin Regional Court posted to the Szczecin Remand Centre bearing a stamp “censored” (“ocenzurowano”).