5.  The applicant was born in 1971 and is currently in detention in Warsaw. 6.  On 17 January 2006 the applicant was arrested and detained on remand. He was suspected of the murder of two people and of inciting the murder of another person who had intended to testify against him in a separate set of proceedings. 7.  He was subsequently convicted several times for various offences. In particular, on 27 February 2013 the Warsaw Regional Court convicted him of murder. 8.  On 19 January 2006 the Warsaw Remand Centre Penitentiary Commission (“the commission”) classified the applicant as a dangerous detainee. The decision stated as follows:
“The commission hereby decides that [the applicant] is to be placed in a designated wing or cell in a remand centre in conditions which provide increased protection for society and for the security of the remand centre.
The commission approves the proposals of the directors of the protection and prison wings.
The detainee has been informed of his right to appeal against the commission’s decision within seven days to the Warsaw Regional Court, XI Penitentiary Division.”
The last sentence of the decision contained information about who was to be informed about the applicant’s placement in a cell for dangerous detainees. 9.  The applicant did not appeal against that decision. 10.  The commission reviewed and upheld its decision to classify the applicant as a dangerous detainee on several occasions. In total, there were over thirty decisions to extend the period of imposition of the regime in respect of the applicant. All the decisions were based on the same pattern of wording, which read as follows:
“The commission has decided to extend [the applicant’s categorisation as a dangerous detainee] as the reasons for his placement in a cell in conditions which provide increased protection for society and for the security of the remand centre have not ceased to exist.” 11.  In particular, a decision of 3 January 2013 to extend the imposition of the dangerous detainee regime on the applicant referred to the seriousness of the charges against him and his highly deficient moral character. 12.  An appeal by the applicant against the latter decision was the only one he made against the series of decisions to impose and extend the dangerous detainee regime on him. 13.  On 30 January 2013 the Warsaw Regional Court dismissed the appeal. The court held that the decision had been lawful. 14.  On 21 November 2013 the commission lifted the dangerous detainee regime applied to the applicant. 15.  The applicant was kept in a cell which was constantly monitored via closed‑circuit television. He was subjected to a body search every time he left or entered the cell, which meant in practice that he had to strip naked in front of prison officers.