Communicated on 19 October 2020 Published on 9 November 2020

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 30943/20 D.S . against Russia lodged on 24 July 2020

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the pending extradition of the applicant ‐ a Turkmen national who is currently living in Krasnodar, Russia ‐ from Russia to Turkmenistan. The applicant, who fled Turkmenistan and obtained refugee status in the Republic of Armenia in 2019, was arrested in Crimea on 30 June 2020 by police officers who, after having verified his identity, found out that he was wanted by the authorities of Turkmenistan.

After having been informed by the Turkmenistan authorities that they would seek his extradition, the applicant was placed in extradition detention on 2 July 2020 in Crimea pending arrival of an official extradition request. He was released on 29 July 2020 as the statutory period of detention had expired and no extradition request had been received from the Turkmenistan authorities in the meantime. However, the applicant was informed verbally by a prosecutor that he would be detained again as soon as the extradition request from Turkmenistan has been received.

The applicant alleges that if extradited to Turkmenistan he would face a real risk of ill-treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, and complains that there are no effective remedies within the meaning of Article 13 of the Convention to have his allegations of ill- treatment examined by the Russian authorities.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. In the light of the general situation in Turkmenistan and the applicant ’ s personal circumstances, would the applicant face a risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention if extradited to his country of origin?

2. Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy, as required by Article 13 of the Convention, for his complaint under Article 3 of the Convention providing automatic suspensive effect and capable of subjecting to a rigorous assessment his allegations about a risk of ill-treatment in his country of origin?

3. Was the applicant provided with sufficient information enabling him to gain effective access to the relevant asylum procedures?

4. Was the applicant prevented from having access to the asylum procedure, as alleged by him? If your answer is in the affirmative, d id the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy in relation to his complaints concerning the refusal of the migration officers to accept his application for asylum? In respect of their answer to this question, the Government are requested to refer to the specific provisions of their national legislation and to provide evidence of available remedies and effective use made of such remedies in comparable situations, in particular, examples of decisions of domestic courts.

The Government are also requested to submit information on the current stage and, if relevant, outcome of the extradition proceedings in the applicant ’ s case.