Communicated on 4 August 2020 Published on 24 August 2020

THIRD SECTION

Applications nos. 2472/11 and 71446/11 Danila Konstantinovich KULIK against Russia and Denis Yakovlevich AKIMOV against Russia lodged on 26 November 2010 and 24 October 2011 respectively

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicants are two Russian nationals, Mr Danila Konstantinovich Kulik , born in 1989, who is detained in the Orenburg Region (first applicant), and Mr Denis Yakovlevich Akimov , born in 1987, who is detained in Tver (second applicant). Mr Akimov is represented before the Court by Mr S. Solomonov , a lawyer practising in St Petersburg.

On 23 March 2010 the Buzulukskiy District Court of the Orenburg Region convicted the first applicant of murder and sentenced him to nine years and six months of imprisonment. The applicant was represented by a state-appointed lawyer at the trial. On 27 May 2010 the Orenburg Regional Court examined the applicant ’ s appeal against the conviction and rejected it. The first applicant was not provided with free legal assistance on appeal.

On 21 January 2011 the Leningrad Regional Court found the second applicant guilty of aggravated murder and trespass and sentenced him to fifteen years and three months of imprisonment. The second applicant and his retained counsel appealed. On 25 April 2011 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, in the absence of the applicant ’ s counsel, examined the appeals and upheld the trial court ’ s judgment.

The applicants complained under Article 6 of the Convention about lack of legal representation on appeal.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular,

- was the first applicant afforded free legal assistance, within the meaning of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention, at the appeal hearing in his criminal case?

- was the second applicant able to defend himself through legal assistance of his own choosing, as required by Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention, at the appeal hearing in his criminal case?