Lexploria

THIRD SECTION

CASE OF MOZHAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

( Applications nos. 16401/12 and 9 others -

see appended list )

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

21 March 2017

FINAL

18/09/2017

This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Mozharov and Others v. Russia ,

The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting as a C hamber composed of:

Helena Jäderblom , President, Branko Lubarda , Luis López Guerra, Helen Keller, Dmitry Dedov, Pere Pastor Vilanova, Alena Poláčková , judges, and Stephen Phillips, Section Registrar ,

Having deliberated in private on 28 February 2017 ,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicted in the appended table.

2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights.

3. The applications were communicated to the Government.

THE FACTS

4. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

5. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS

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

II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION

7. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

8. The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants ’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, MurÅ¡ić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13 , § § 91-141, ECHR 2016; KudÅ‚a v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 90-94, ECHR 2000-XI, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia , nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 139-165, 10 January 2012). It reiterates in particular that extreme lack of space in a prison cell or overcrowding weighs heavily as an aspect to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the impugned detention conditions were “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many authorities, Karalevičius v. Lithuania , no. 53254/99, §§ 36 ‑ 40, 7 April 2005).

9. In the leading case of Sergey Babushkin v. Russia ( no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

10. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants ’ conditions of detention were inadequate.

11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

III. REMAINING COMPLAINTS

12. The applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, in accordance with the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Sergey Babushkin case (cited above, §§ 38-45).

IV. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

13. Article 41 of the Convention provides:

“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”

14. Regard being had to the documents in its possession, to its case-law (see, in particular, Butko v. Russia , no. 32036/10 , 12 November 2015 and Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, (just satisfaction), no. 5993/08, 16 October 2014) and the long delay for some of the applicants in filing the application, the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

15. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1. Decides to join the applications;

2. Declares the applications admissible;

3. Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;

4. Holds that there has been a violation as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);

5. Holds

(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention , the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 21 March 2017 , pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Stephen Phillips Helena Jäderblom 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

Representative name and location

Facility

Start and end date

Duration

Number of inmates per brigade

Sq. m. per inmate

Number of toilets per brigade

Specific grievances

Other complaints under well-established case-law

Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses

per applicant

(in euros) [1]

16401/12

25/02/2012

Vladimir Sergeyevich Mozharov

31/01/1971

IK-11 Bor Nizhniy Novgorod Region

03/10/2011 to

16/12/2014

3 year(s) and

2 month(s) and

14 day(s)

130 inmate(s)

2.2 m²

6 toilet(s)

small walking yard of 73 sq.m . for 260 inmates, six sinks, no hot water, cold premises, poor food quality, meals intake for 5 min., not provided with warm seasonal clothes and shoes, poor quality of bedding, weekly shower for 40 min. for 40 inmates,

10 shower heads, unsanitary conditions in shower

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

11,800

67528/14

04/09/2014

Ivan Aleksandrovich Tumanov

26/12/1980

Prison hospital

No. LIU-51

Nizhniy Tagil

05/05/2013 to

13/03/2014

10 month(s) and

9 day(s)

200 inmate(s)

1.8 m²

3 toilet(s)

3 sinks, 3 urinals, squat toilets inadequately separated from one another and without doors, absence of toilet flushing system allowed unpleasant odour to permeate the premises, no fresh air, no ventilation, damp and cold premises with wall covered with mould, infestation with fle a s, cockroaches, spiders, worms, mice and rats, no disinfection by the administration, lack of natural light, dim electric light, inmates with open tuberculosis, worn and dirty bed linen and bedding plus their unpleasant odour, shower once in 8 days - 8 min. per inmate, 9 shower heads

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

5,000

74106/14

13/11/2014

Aleksandr Igorevich Sakharov

21/03/1987

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-4 Ostrovskoe Kostroma Region

26/10/2008 to

25/07/2014

5 year(s) and

9 month(s)

120 inmate(s)

1.9 m²

3 toilet(s)

critical condition of the building, damp and cold premises - walls covered with mould and in winter with ice, infestation with rats, lice and bedbugs, no disinfection and disinfectants by administration, small and damp walking yard with iron fence of 3 m. high without greenery and with unpleasant odour of sewage, no ventilation, four pairs of hot/cold water taps in bathroom, low water pressure, poor quality of running/drinking water, squat toilet without doors, one urinal of 1.5 m., toilet in view of the guard of opposite sex, inmates infected with HIV and tuberculosis, lack of fresh air and natural light, dim electric light, poor quality of tableware

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

5,000

77730/14

09/12/2014

Aleksey Yuryevich Kirillov

15/04/1964

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma

15/09/2011 to

24/11/2014

3 year(s) and

2 month(s) and

10 day(s)

140 inmate(s)

1.5 m²

4 toilet(s)

critical condition of the building, 4 sinks, no hot water, regular water interruption, damp and cold premises, walls covered with mould and in winter with ice, infestation with rats, lice and bedbugs, no disinfection and disinfectants by administration, distance between sleeping places of 40 cm, small and damp walking yard with iron fence of 3 m. high, without greenery and with unpleasant odour of sewage, squat toilet without doors in view of the guard of opposite sex, poor food quality

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

5,000

77733/14

09/12/2014

Petr Petrovich Gladko

03/10/1957

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma

27/05/2007 to

10/09/2014

7 year(s) and

3 month(s) and

15 day(s)

100 inmate(s)

1 m²

3 toilet(s)

critical condition of the building, no toilet flushing system, urinal of 70 cm, 3 sinks, no hot water, low water pressure, small walking yard of 40 sq.m . for 300 inmates with an iron fence of 4 m. - lack of sunlight and wind, unpleasant odour of sewage in the walking yard, infestation with bedbugs and lice, no disinfection by administration, poor food quality

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

5,000

77916/14

09/12/2014

Pavel Nikolayevich Andreyev

18/06/1983

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma

15/09/2011 to

24/11/2014

3 year(s) and

2 month(s) and

10 day(s)

140 inmate(s)

1.5 m²

4 toilet(s)

4 sinks, no hot water, regular water interruption, distance between sleeping places of 40 cm, damp and cold premises, walls covered with mould and in winter with ice, infestation with rats, lice and bedbugs, no disinfection and disinfectants by administration, small walking yard with iron fence of 3 m. high, damp walking yards without greenery and with unpleasant odour of sewage, squat toilet without doors, toilet in view of the administration members of opposite sex, poor food quality

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

5,000

6141/15

16/01/2015

Fedor Fedorovich Krasnobayev

02/06/1988

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-4 Ostrovskoe Kostroma Region

15/10/2008 to

15/10/2014

6 year(s) and

1 day(s)

120 inmate(s)

3 toilet(s)

less than 2 sq.m . per inmate, one urinal of 1.5 m., squat toilets without doors – those using toilets were observed by guards of opposite sex, damp premises covered with mould, in winter walls covered with ice, infestation with rats and bedbugs, no sanitary measures by administration

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

5,000

8376/15

02/02/2015

Yevgeniy Igorevich Zenov

01/01/1983

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma

07/11/2013 to

10/09/2014

10 month(s) and

4 day(s)

60 inmate(s)

less than 2 sq.m . per inmate, 1 sink, infestation with bedbugs, lack of sunlight in the walking yard, no disinfection measures by administration, poor food quality

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

5,000

9166/15

02/02/2015

Ivan Vasilyevich Letyago

24/11/1975

IK-11 Bor Nizhniy Novgorod Region

28/07/2009

pending

More than

7 year(s) and

7 month(s) and

7 day(s)

135 inmate(s)

1.2 m²

6 sinks, poor food quality, no warm seasonal clothes and shoes, 5 min. for food intake

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

11,500

12321/15

22/04/2015

Aleksandr Viktorovich Dyadkov

17/09/1987

IK-11 Bor Nizhniy Novgorod Region

28/08/2012

pending

More than

4 year(s) and

6 month(s) and

7 day(s)

135 inmate(s)

1.5 m²

6 toilet(s)

6 sinks, no hot water, poor food quality, not provided with warm seasonal clothes and shoes, meals intake for 5 min.

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

10,500

[1] . Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

Menu

CASE OF MOZHAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

CASE OF MOZHAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

LEXI