Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

ABASHYN v. UKRAINE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS

Doc ref: 34911/04;14045/06;22258/08;35565/06;39160/05 • ECHR ID: 001-114008

Document date: September 25, 2012

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

ABASHYN v. UKRAINE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS

Doc ref: 34911/04;14045/06;22258/08;35565/06;39160/05 • ECHR ID: 001-114008

Document date: September 25, 2012

Cited paragraphs only

FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 34911/04 Sergey Yevgenyevich ABASHYN against Ukraine and 4 other applications (see list appended)

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 25 September 2012 as a Committee composed of:

Mark Villiger , President, André Potocki , Paul Lemmens , judges, and Stephen Phillips , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above applications lodged on various dates specified in the appendix,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicants are Ukrainian nationals whose personal details are set out in the appendix.

The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Nazar Kulchytskyy, of the Ministry of Justice .

The applicants lodged the applications with the Court while they were being detained in the context of their criminal prosecution. According to the material submitted by the Government, the applicants were subsequently released from detention (for details see the appendix).

The applicants mainly complained under Article 6 of the Convention that the criminal proceedings against them had been unfair. Mr Abashyn and Mr Zubenko further complained under Article 3 of the Convention that they had been tortured by the police during the pre-trial stage of the criminal proceedings. Mr Zubenko also complained that his pre-trial detention had been contrary to Article 5 of the Convention.

Relying on Article 34 of the Convention, the applicants complained that they were not able to obtain copies of documents from the domestic case files to submit them in support of their complaints before the Court. Mr Zubenko also alleged that the dispatch of his letters to the Court was often delayed by the prison authorities and that the conditions of his detention worsened (in particular as regards the limitation on daily exercise) because of his complaints to the Court.

The applicants also raised other complaints under the Convention.

On 22 June 2011 the applicants ’ complaints under Articles 3, 5, 6 and 34 of the Convention were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received from the applicants.

The applicants also did not reply to the Court ’ s letters of 23 May 2012 warning the applicants of the possibility that their cases might be struck out of the Court ’ s list pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. With the exception of Mr Urozhok, the Court ’ s letters were sent by registered post to the applicants ’ permanent addresses, as indicated in their application forms. The letter to Mr Urozhok was sent to the detention centre where he had been detained during the criminal proceedings against him, as he had given no alternative address for corresponding with the Court.

According to the acknowledgement of receipt slips, the Court ’ s letters of 23 May 2012 were delivered to Mr Zubenko and Mr Danchenko on 31 May and 15 June 2012 respectively.

THE LAW

The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their common factual and legal background.

The Court further considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the cases.

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case s out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to join the applications;

Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.

Stephen Phillips Mark Villiger Deputy Registrar President

Appendix

No

Application No

Lodged on

Applicant

Date of birth

Released from detention

34911/04

05/08/2004

Sergey Yevgenyevich ABASHYN

10/08/1955

23/05/2007

39160/05

13/10/2005

Yuriy Vladimirovich KALGA

29/07/1967

17/08/2009

14045/06

27/03/2006

Anatoliy Anatolyevich ZUBENKO

20/12/1976

October 2009 (the exact date is unknown)

35565/06

17/08/2006

Aleksandr Yevgenyevich DANCHENKO

24/04/1977

22/08/2007

22258/08

10/04/2008

Ruslan Vagirovich UROZHOK

23/07/1981

21/01/2011

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846