THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 53323/17 Yulian Yevgenyevich NEMTSEV against Russia and 2 other applications (see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting on 21 June 2018 as a Committee composed of:

Alena Poláčková , President, Dmitry Dedov , Jolien Schukking , judges, and Liv Tigerstedt , Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

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

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicant s is set out in the appended table.

The applicants ’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government ”) . In application no. 71910/17 the applicant also raised another complaint concerning conditions of detention during transportation under Article 3 of the Convention.

THE LAW

A. Joinder of the applications

Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.

B. Complaints under Article 3 of the Convention ( inadequate conditions of detention )

The Court reiterates that it adopts conclusions after evaluating all the evidence, including such inferences as may flow from the facts and the parties ’ submissions. According to its established case-law, proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact (see, for example, Ananyev and Others v. Russia , nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, § 121, 10 January 2012). In cases regarding conditions of detention the burden of proof may, under certain circumstances, be shifted to the authorities (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000-VII; see also Mathew v. the Netherlands , no. 24919/03, § 156, ECHR 2005 IX). Nevertheless, an applicant must provide an elaborate and consistent account of the conditions of his or her detention, mentioning the specific elements which would enable the Court to determine that the complaint is not manifestly ill-founded or inadmissible on any other grounds.

In the present cases, the Government contended that the applicants had been afforded adequate personal space and had individual sleeping places. Moreover, they had been allowed daily outdoor exercise and had had proper access to hygienic facilities. The Government relied on the information provided by the penitentiary officials and excerpts from original documents showing confirming that the applicants had sufficient personal space .

The Court is satisfied that the excerpts are original documents which were prepared during the periods under the examination and which showed the actual number of inmates present in the respective detention facilities on relevant dates. The Court also notes that the excerpts from the registers demonstrate that at the relevant time the facilities were not overcrowded.

Having assessed the evidence presented by the parties in its entirety, the Court gives credence to the primary documents produced by the Government and rejects the applicants ’ allegations as unsubstantiated.

Taking into account the cumulative effect of the conditions of the applicants ’ detention in the relevant detention facilities, as well as a short duration of their stays in the conditions of which they complained (see Fetisov and Others v. Russia , nos. 43710/07 and 3 others, § § 134-138 , 17 January 2012 ) , the Court does not consider that the conditions reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhuman or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention.

In view of the above, the Court finds that the complaints about the conditions of detention as described in these applications (see appended table) are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

C. Remaining complaints

In application no. 71910/17, the applicant also raised a complaint under the well-established case-law of the Court concerning inadequate condition during transport under Article 3 of the Convention.

The Court has examined the complaint and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession showing the short duration of the trip in satisfactory conditions (see details provided in the appended table below) , th i s complaint is also manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Declares the application s inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 12 July 2018 .

Liv Tigerstedt Alena Poláčková Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention

( inadequate conditions of detention)

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant name

Date of birth

Facility

Start and end date

Duration

Inmates per brigade

Sq. m. per inmate

Specific grievances

Other complaints under well-established case-law

53323/17

03/07/2017

Yulian Yevgenyevich Nemtsev

11/12/1981

SHIZO FKU IK-1 Syktyvkar

20/01/2017 to 23/01/2017

4 days

SHIZO FKU IK-1 Syktyvkar

08/02/2017 to 8/02/2017

11 days

SHIZO FKU IK-1 Syktyvkar

22/02/2017 to 19/03/2017

26 days

PKT FKU IK-1 Syktyvkar

22/03/2017 to 27/04/2017

1 month and 6 days

SHIZO FKU IK-1 Syktyvkar

27/04/2017 to 12/05/2017

16 days

1 inmate

3 m²

1 inmate

3 m²

1 inmate

3 m²

3 inmate

3 m²

1 inmate

3 m²

lack of or insufficient electric light, mouldy or dirty cell, smelly toilet, poor quality of food

lack of or insufficient electric light, no or restricted access to warm water, mouldy or dirty cell

lack of or insufficient electric light, no or restricted access to warm water, mouldy or dirty cell

inadequate temperature, cold wet floor, poor quality of food, repetitive radio programmes

lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of food

56223/17

12/07/2017

Denis Vitalyevich Penzin

19/01/1981

IK-24 Sverdlovsk Region

15/09/2016 to

27/02/2017

5 months and 13 days

16 inmate

lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water

71910/17

10/09/2017

Valeriy Yuryevich Tokarev

17/04/1969

IK-5 Nizhniy Novgorod

20/03/2017 to 03/04/2017

15 days

3.4 m²

lack of fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, inadequate temperature, bad odour in the cell, mouldy or dirty cell, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of toiletries, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, passive smoking, lack of requisite medical assistance, poor quality of medical assistance

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport – van, 20/03/2017, 4-hour trip with 5 other inmates in “ Gazel ” car