Communicated on 7 July 2014

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 63294/12 Jacek KAZIMIERCZUK against Poland lodged on 18 September 2012

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Jacek Kazimierczuk, is a Polish national, who was born in 1975 and is currently detained in Warszawa Remand Centre .

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

1. First set of criminal proceedings (case no. VK 87/05; case no. II AKa 161/13)

On 12 January 2005 the applicant was arrested by the police on suspicion of leading an organised criminal gang, having ordered commission of a murder, committing robberies, extortions and trafficking in drugs.

On 12 January 2005 the Ł om ż a District Court decided to detain the applicant on remand relying on the reasonable suspicion that he had committed the offences in question. The court attached importance to the likelihood of a severe sentence of imprisonment being imposed on the applicant and the risk that he would attempt to obstruct the proceedings.

The applicant ’ s appeals against further decisions extending his detention, his numerous applications for release and appeals against refusals to release him were all unsuccessful.

On 7 February 2012 the Warsaw Regional Court convicted the applicant, and seven other co-accused. The applicant was sentenced to five years and six months ’ imprisonment. His detention was further extended.

The applicant lodged an appeal against the judgment.

On 4 July 2013 the Warsaw Court of Appeal upheld the judgment.

2. Second set of criminal proceedings (case no. IIKp 21/06; case no. VK 164/08; case no. IIAKa 250/13)

On 19 January 2006 the Ł om ż a District Court decided to detain the applicant on remand in another set of proceedings on suspicion of murder, trafficking in arms, and production and trafficking in drugs.

The applicant ’ s detention was subsequently extended by decisions of the Warsaw Regional Court, the Bialystok Regional Court, the Bialystok Court of Appeal and the Bialystok District Court.

On 10 September 2010 the prosecutor amended the charges against the applicant.

On 30 October 2012 the Warsaw Regional Court convicted the applicant of thirteen counts of various offences including two counts of murder and sentenced him to twenty-five years ’ imprisonment. On the same day his detention was further extended.

The applicant lodged an appeal against the judgment.

On 30 September 2013 the Warsaw Court of Appeal upheld the judgment.

3. Imposition of the “dangerous detainee” regime

On 13 January 2005 the Remand Centre Penitentiary Commission classified the applicant as a “dangerous detainee”. It considered that it had been necessary to classify the applicant as a “dangerous detainee” as he had been suspected of leading an organised criminal group, ordering commission of a murder, robberies, extortions and drug trafficking committed together with other persons.

The Remand Centre Penitentiary Commission reviewed and upheld its decision classifying the applicant as a “dangerous detainee” on numerous occasions. The authorities referred to the decision of the Ł om ż a District Court of 12 January 2005 ordering the applicant ’ s detention.

On 19 April 2012 the Warsaw Remand Centre Penitentiary Commission further extended the imposition of the “dangerous detainee” regime on the applicant.

On 11 July 2012 the Warsaw Remand Centre Penitentiary Commission extended the applicant ’ s “dangerous detainee” regime. The applicant appealed.

On 14 August 2012 the Warsaw Regional Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision.

On 4 October 2012 the Warsaw Remand Centre Commission reviewed and upheld the decision classifying the applicant as a “dangerous detainee”. The applicant appealed.

On 30 October 2012 the Warsaw Regional Court upheld the decision of the Warsaw Remand Centre Commission of 4 October 2012.

The “dangerous detainee” regime was lifted on 31 January 2013.

B. Relevant domestic law

The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the imposition of dangerous detainee status are set out in the Court ’ s judgments in the cases of Piechowicz v. Poland (no. 20071/07 , §§ 105-117, 17 April 2012), and Horych v. Poland (no. 13621/08 , §§ 44-56, 17 April 2012).

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about lengthy imposition of the dangerous detainee regime.

He also complains that he had no effective remedy from the decisions of the penitentiary commission imposing on him the special regime and extending the regime. Moreover, the applicant complains that the proceedings before the commission were unfair.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Having regard to the cumulative effect of the “dangerous detainee” regime imposed on the applicant from 13 January 2005 to 31 January 2013, has he been subjected to treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention? The parties are requested to refer in their observations to the leading judgment of Piechowicz v. Poland , no. 20071/07, 17 April 2012.

2. Having regard to the applicant ’ s complaint about a lack of fair trial in the proceedings before the penitentiary commission and a lack of an effective remedy against the decisions of the penitentiary commission to impose and extend the dangerous detainee regime:

a) Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? Reference is made to the case of Enea v. Italy [GC], no. 74912/01, § 107, ECHR 2009.

b) Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy as required by Article 13 of the Convention?

The Government are invited to submit a copy of the relevant decision imposing the regime on the applicant and further decisions extending the application of the regime.