Lexploria

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 23686/13 Sergey Valeriyevich KOZLOV against Russia and 10 other applications (see appended table )

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 19 March 2019 as a Committee composed of:

Alena Poláčková , President, Dmitry Dedov , Jolien Schukking , judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table ,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

1. The applicants are Russian nationals, except for Mr Shirinov who is a national of Tajikistan, living in various regions of the Russian Federation. Their personal details appear in the appended table.

2. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented initially by Mr G. Matyushkin , the Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights, and then by his successor in that office, Mr M. Galperin .

3. The facts of the cases, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

4. On various dates between 2012 and 2014 the applicants were criminally prosecuted and convicted of various offences.

5. The applicants ’ convictions were based among other evidence on the statements of one or more witnesses for prosecution, which were made during pre-trial stages of the proceedings and read out in open court while those witnesses were absent.

6. Allowing the witnesses ’ pre-trial statements as evidence the trial courts in their judgments relied on the impossibility to locate them and/or their refusal to appear at court, and/or remoteness of their place of residence as well as engagements existing at the material time and/or their poor state of health that made impossible for them to appear before the court.

7. The convictions were based on a multiplicity of evidence, including statements by the applicants made at the pre-trial stage and at trial in the presence of their lawyers, trial statements by the police officers, other witnesses for prosecution, material and documentary evidence. The domestic courts analysed the witnesses ’ pre-trial statements and established their coherence and consistency with other evidence.

8. The judgments of the trial courts were upheld on appeal.

COMPLAINTS

9. The applicants complained under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention that the domestic courts had not provided good reasons for reading-out of the pre-trial statements of the witnesses for prosecution and thus the applicants had been unable to have those witnesses examined at the trial.

10. The applicants, except for Mr Kozlov , Ms Shlyapkina , Mr Kufayev , Mr Chesnokov , Mr Dubinin and Mr Shcherbatykh (applications nos. 23686/13, 52635/13, 15803/14, 32501/14, 45811/14 and 56742/14 respectively), also complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the outcome of the proceedings and assessment of evidence.

11. Ms Shlyapkina (application no. 52635/13) complained in addition under Articles 7 and 13 of the Convention.

12. Mr Gorbatyuk and Mr Vinogradov (applications nos. 65765/13 and 77434/13 respectively) further complained under Article 3 of the Convention.

13. Mr Dubinin (application no. 45811/14) complained also under Article 6 § 2 of the Convention.

14. Mr Gostev (application no. 60644/14) complained under Article 7 § 2 of the Convention.

THE LAW

15. The Court first considers that in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications listed in the appended table should be joined, given their common legal background.

16. The respondent Government in their observations argued that the applicants had had a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. They argued that the applicants ’ convictions were based on other abundant evidence. Referring to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, as well as the relevant interpretative guidelines and practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Government contended that the Russian legal system had afforded the applicants sufficient procedural safeguards aimed at securing their right to examine witnesses testifying against them and guarantees of a fair trial.

17. Certain applicants disagreed, while the others did not provide specific arguments.

18. The Court has carefully examined the applications listed in the appended table and concluded that, in the light of the Court ’ s primary concern under Article 6 § 1 to evaluate the overall fairness of the criminal proceedings (see Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, § 118, ECHR 2011, and Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no. 9154/10, § 101, ECHR 2015), the presumption that in principle the Russian legal system offers robust procedural guarantees securing the right of an accused to examine witnesses testifying against him, ensuring that the reading out of absent witnesses ’ testimony is possible only as an exception (see Zadumov v. Russia , no. 2257/12, § 63, 12 December 2017, recently reiterated in Kiba and Others ( dec. ), nos. 38047/08 and 2 others, § 16, 17 April 2018), the material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, the applications are manifestly ill-founded as well as the accessory complaints of all the applicants except for Mr Kozlov , Ms Shlyapkina , Mr Kufayev , Mr Chesnokov , Mr Dubinin and Mr Shcherbatykh (applications nos. 23686/13, 52635/13, 15803/14, 32501/14, 45811/14 and 56742/14 respectively) under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, complaints of Ms Shlyapkina (application no. 52635/13) under Articles 7 and 13 of the Convention, complaints of Mr Gorbatyuk and Mr Vinogradov (applications nos. 65765/13 and 77434/13 respectively) under Article 3 of the Convention, complaint of Mr Dubinin (application no. 45811/14) under Article 6 § 2 of the Convention and that of Mr Gostev (application no. 60644/14) under Article 7 § 2 of the Convention, which were not communicated to the Government, and thus must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Declares the applications inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 11 April 2019 .

Fatoş Aracı Alena Poláčková Deputy Registrar President

Appendix

No.

Application

no .

Date of introduction

Applicant name

Date of birth

Place of residence

Represented by

Date of the trial and appeal/cassation courts ’ judgments

Witness absent from trial

23686/13

12/02/2013

Sergey Valeriyevich

KOZLOV

Potma , Republic of Mordovia

19/06/1980

Aleksandr Mikhaylovich

Plodukhin

Presnenskiy District Court of Moscow

18/06/2012

Moscow City Court

31/10/2012

Convicted of murder

Mr P.,

Ms P.,

Mr S.,

Ms Yu.,

Ms Z.,

Mr R.

24356/13

07/03/2013

Nasimzhon Nodirovich

SHIRINOV

31/07/1975

Startsevo , Krasnoyarsk Region

Svetlana Nikolayevna

Rzhepko

Leninskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk

03/09/2012

Krasnoyarsk Regional Court

13/12/2012

Convicted of attempted drug dealing on large scale, attempted drug dealing, attempted drug dealing on especially large scale

Mr “Prokhorov”,

Mr B.

52635/13

01/08/2013

Marina Anatolyevna

SHLYAPKINA

23/10/1986

Ulyanovsk

Yekaterina Alekseyevna

Fetisova

Leninskiy District Court of Ulyanovsk, Ulyanovsk Region

29/11/2012

Ulyanovsk Regional Court

06/02/2013

Ulyanovsk Regional Court

14/02/2014

Convicted of swindling through an official position on a large scale

Mr S.

65765/13

26/09/2013

Aleksandr Fedorovich

GORBATYUK

14/02/1978

Mikhaylovka , Primorskiy Region

Aleksey Sergeyevich Arkhipov

Mikhaylovka District Court of the Primorskiy Region

05/07/2012

Primorskiy Regional Court

27/03/2013

Convicted of extortion by a group of persons in preliminary collusion (3 episodes) and of preparation for extortion by a group of persons in preliminary collusion

Mr D.,

Mr S.

77434/13

14/11/2013

Konstantin Konstantinovich

VINOGRADOV

12/05/1982

Armarvir , Krasnodar Region

Irina Vladimirovna

Khrunova

Tsentralniy District Court of Sochi, Krasnodar Region

18/03/2013

Krasnodar Regional Court

15/05/2013

Convicted for attempted drug trafficking on especially large scale

Mrs Z.

15803/14

12/02/2014

Igor Aleksandrovich

KUFAYEV

03/07/1969

Barnaul

Grigoriy Gennadyevich Akimov

Tsentralniy District Court of Barnaul, Altay Region

23/05/2013

Altay Regional Court

20/09/2013

Convicted of swindling (2 episodes) by a group of persons on preliminary collusion on especially large scale through official position, money laundering (2 episodes) on a large scale through an official position where one of the episodes was committed by a group of persons on preliminary collusion

Mr Ch.

32501/14

07/12/2014

Yanis Aleksandrovich

CHESNOKOV

22/06/1985

Karymskoye , Zabaykalskiy Region

Mikhaylovskiy District Court of the Amur Region

14/08/2013

Amursk Regional Court

24/09/2014

Convicted of attempted dealing

of psychotropic substances by an organized group in large quantities

(3 episodes), attempted drug dealing

by an organized group in large quantities

(2 episodes), drug dealing in especially large quantities (2 episodes), unlawful storage of drugs without the purpose of trafficking in especially large quantities

Mr P.

33551/14

07/04/2014

Yuriy Sergeyevich GUROV

Moscow

02/05/1976

Aleksandr Stepanovich

Bukharets

Izmailovskiy District Court of Moscow

16/07/2013

Moscow City Court 07/10/2013

Convicted of attempted drug dealing by a group of persons on preliminary collusion

Ms K.

45811/14

16/06/2014

Maksim Andreyevich

DUBININ

17/04/1973

Ryazan

Erika Nikolayevna

Barsukova

Golovinskiy District Court of Moscow

17/09/2013

Moscow City Court 22/04/2014

Convicted of attempted drug dealing

Mr K.

56742/14

24/09/2014

Viktor Vasilyevich

SHCHERBATYKH

03/12/1978

Sorda , Kirov Region

Vyazniki Town Court of the Vladimir Region

21/10/2013

Vladimir Regional Court

27/03/2014

Convicted of murder

Mr K.

60644/14

28/07/2014

Anatoliy Vasilyevich GOSTEV

28/03/1985

Novocherkassk

Leninskiy District Court of Rostov-on-Don

27/11/2013

Rostov Regional Court

05/02/2014

Convicted of burglary with unlawful entry to premises and of burglary with unlawful entry to premises on a large scale

Mr E.

Menu

KOZLOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

KOZLOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA