Published on 31 May 2021

FIFTH SECTION

Application no. 42010/18 Andriy Gennadiyovych YAKOVLYEV against Ukraine lodged on 25 August 2018 communicated on 10 May 2021

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The case concerns the applicant ’ s force-feeding in Zamkova Prison during the period from 31 January to 6 February 2018, after he had gone on hunger strike consuming only water.

That measure was based on the ruling of the Izyaslav Town Court (“the Izyaslav Court”) of 31 January 2018, which relied on a medical finding that the applicant ’ s health was deteriorating (lowered blood sugar level, aggravation of chronic diseases, indications of potassium deficiency) and that his condition might become critical in case of continued deprivation of food. The doctor noted, however, that the applicant did not require hospitalisation.

On 5 February 2018 the applicant lodged an appeal. He observed that Article 116 § 3 of the Code on the Execution of Sentences (as amended in 2016) explicitly prohibited force-feeding of prisoners on hunger strike and that, in accordance with that provision, such a measure could be applied only where there was an established risk of a permanent health disorder and an obvious risk to the person ’ s life. In the applicant ’ s view, such risks had not been established in his case. He further noted that, while there was no legally established procedure for force-feeding in Ukraine, an official of Zamkova Prison had specified in the court hearing that this would be done through administration of a special nutritional mixture to the applicant through a tube and that, in the event of resistance, physical force would be applied, with use of handcuffing and a “mouth-widener” ( роторозширювач ), followed by a forceful insertion of a rubber tube. The applicant submitted that such treatment amounted to torture.

On 26 February 2018 the Khmelnytskyy Regional Court of Appeal rejected the applicant ’ s appeal as “unfounded”.

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention that the medical necessity for his force-feeding was not convincingly shown to exist and that the manner in which that measure was carried out was particularly cruel and amounted to torture. He described his force-feeding as follows. Being handcuffed in a tight manner, with his hands behind the back, he was held by several prison officers. One of them forcefully inserted a special rubber tube deeply into the applicant ’ s throat causing him serious pain and making him choke. The whole procedure lasted from thirty to ninety minutes.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Was the applicant subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of his force ‑ feeding (see Nevmerzhitsky v. Ukraine , no. 54825/00, §§ 93-99, ECHR 2005 ‑ II (extracts))?