CHEBATURKINA v. RUSSIA and 1 other applications
Doc ref: 50083/19;20899/20 • ECHR ID: 001-206787
Document date: November 27, 2020
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 5
Communicated on 27 November 2020 Published on 14 December 2020
THIRD SECTION
Applications nos. 50083/19 and 20899/20 Irina Aleksandrovna CHEBATURKINA against Russia and Galina Yeliseyevna FILKOVA against Russia lodged on 11 September 2019 and 25 March 2020 respectively
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicants complain under Articles 2 and 13 of the Convention that the prison authorities were responsible for the suicide of their relatives in custody and that there was no effective investigation in that regard.
Applicant in application no. 50083/19 points, in particular, that her son had had two suicide attempts before the last one mainly due to coercion and ill ‑ treatment at the hands of the prison authorities and that, whilst being fully aware of the risk, the prison administration did nothing to prevent her son from harming himself. She relies on Article 3 of the Convention insofar as she alleges her son to have been ill-treated.
Applicant in application no. 20899/20 points at a very probable ill-treatment of her son prior to his death and deplores the negligent behaviour of the prison administration, which knew about the risk and did nothing to protect him.
The relevant details regarding the applicants ’ allegations and their version of factual circumstances are reflected in the attached appendices. The information regarding the alleged breach of the substantive aspects of Article 2 of the Convention is contained in Appendix No. 1. The reaction of the domestic authorities to the applicants ’ complaints is reflected in Appendix No. 2.
Table of cases:
No.
Case name
Application no.
Lodged on
Applicant
Year of Birth
Place of Residence
Nationality
Diseased person in respect of whom the applicant complains
Affiliation with the applicant
Represented by
1.Chebaturkina v. Russia
50083/19
11/09/2019
Irina Aleksandrovna CHEBATURKINA
1959Volgograd
Russian
Mr Sergey Aleksandrovich CHEBATURKIN
the applicant ’ s son
-
2.Filkova v. Russia 20899/20
25/03/2020
Galina Yeliseyevna FILKOVA
1959the Sverdlovsk Region, Staraya Bashkarka
Russian
Mr Aleksey Viktorovich FILKOV
the applicant ’ s son
Aleksandr UVAROV
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Have the applicants ’ relatives ’ rights, guaranteed by Article 2 and 3 of the Convention, been violated? In particular, did their deaths result from ill ‑ treatment or other unlawful action by State officials?
2. Is the respondent Government responsible for the deaths of the applicants ’ relatives? In particular, did the authorities know or ought to have know n about a credible risk of suicide of Mr Chebaturkin and Mr Filkov and, if so, did they take reasonable measures with a view to protecting their right to life?
3. Was the investigation by the domestic authorities into the alleged ill ‑ treatment and deaths of the applicants ’ relatives in breach of Article 2 and Article 3 of the Convention (see Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 104, ECHR 2000-VII, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000 ‑ IV; and S.F. v. Switzerland , no. 23405/16, §§ 116-128, 30 June 2020)?
No
Application No. and Title
APPENDIX No. 1
Articles 2 or 3 - Substantive aspect
CIRCUMSTANCES OF ALLEGED SUICIDE
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
POSSIBLE SIGNS OF ILL-TREATMENT
Date
Time
Facts
Region
Town Location
Entity
Cause of death
Applicant ’ s profile
Date
Doc Type
Authority
Description of Injuries
1.Chebaturkina v. Russia
50083/19
30/06/2015
the Volgograd Region
FKU IK-19
Cut his own neck
Previous suicide attempts: 17/05/2015, 03/06/2015
General allegations of ill-treatment by prison administration
2.Filkova v. Russia 20899/20
22/01/2019
Zlatoust, the Chelyabinsk Region
Pig den on the territory of
FKU IK-25
Hanging/ strangulation
No past history of suicide or psychological deviations
22/01/2019
Forensic report no. 117
Forensic bureau
“bruises of the frontal area on the right (6), back surface of the left wrist (12), scratches and a bruise in the area of the left knee joint (2)”
No
Application no.
Title
APPENDIX No. 2
Articles 2 and 3 - Procedural aspect
DOMESTIC COMPLAINT AND THE GOVERNMENT REACTION
Date of Complaint
Authority
Type of Reaction
Date(s)
Procedural Outcome
1.
50083/19
Chebaturkina v. Russia
Preliminary inquiry brought proprio motu
Investigation Committee
Refusals
5/12/2015
The applicant ’ s allegations pointing at probable ill-treatment and general harassment prior to the suicide, evidenced among other things by two attempts of suicide, were not critically examined. Also, the allegation of negligent behaviour by the prison administration which clearly knew about the suicide risk was not examined at all.
On 11/12/2018 the Tsentralnyy District Court of Volgograd dismissed the applicant ’ s complaint against the decision of 5/12/2015. On 18/03/2019 the Volgograd Regional Court upheld the decision.
2.
20899/20
Filkova v. Russia
Preliminary inquiry brought proprio motu
Prosecutor ’ s office of Zlatoust
Refusals
21/02/2019
4/04/2019
The applicant ’ s allegations pointing at probable ill-treatment prior to the suicide were not critically examined. All refusals were quashed.
On 18/10/2019 the Zlatoust Town Court dismissed the applicant ’ s complaint against the investigator ’ s decision. On 20/01/2020 the Chelyabinsk Regional Court upheld the decision.