Communicated on 4 August 2020 Published on 24 August 2020

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 62082/10 Aleksandr Aleksandrovich IVANOV against Russia and 9 other applications (see list appended)

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicants are Russian nationals. The application numbers, the dates of lodging of the applications, the applicants ’ names, their personal details, the names of their legal representatives, where applicable, and the details concerning the applicants ’ cases and the particulars of the domestic proceedings are set out in the Appendix.

The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

The applicants have been convicted in criminal proceedings of bribe ‑ related offences. The principal evidence against them derived from operational experiments (undercover operations) conducted in accordance with Section 6 of the Operational-Search Activities Act of Russia.

At their trials the applicants claimed that the offences in question were committed as a result of entrapment by the authorities. They alleged the involvement of agents provocateurs .

Ms Stepanova (application no. 31415/17) and Mr Romanov (application no. 34980/18) also alleged that the covert audio and video surveillance made in the course of the undercover operation was unlawful.

Ms Stepanova (application no. 31415/17) also objected to the admission of the recordings obtained during the undercover operation as evidence in the criminal proceedings.

These objections were dismissed by the domestic courts.

The respective judgments were held by the judicial bodies on the dates indicated in the table below. The judgments became final.

COMPLAINTS

The applicants complain under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that they had been convicted of criminal offences which they had committed only because they had been incited to do so by an agent provocateur .

Ms Stepanova and Mr Romanov (application nos. 31415/17 and 34980/18) also complain under Article 8 of the Convention that covert audio and video surveillance measures carried out against them in the course of the undercover operation had violated their right to respect for their private life.

Lastly, Ms Stepanova (application no. 31415/17) complains under Article 6 § 1 that her conviction had been based on audio and video recordings which had been obtained unlawfully in the course of the undercover operation and admitted as evidence by the trial court.

COMMON QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

On account of undercover operations in the applicants ’ cases and having regard to the judgments in the case of Nosko and Nefedov v Russia , nos. 5753/09 and 11789/10, 30 October 2014 and in the cases of Veselov and Others v. Russia (nos. 23200/10 and 2 others, 2 October 2012) and Lagutin and Others v. Russia (nos. 6228/09 and 4 others, 24 April 2014), 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?

CASE-SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

Application no. 31415/17

1. Has there been a violation of the applicant ’ s rights guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention as a result of the covert surveillance (see e.g., Akhlyustin v. Russia , no. 21200/05, 7 November 2017, and Zubkov and Others v. Russia , nos. 29431/05 and 2 others, 7 November 2017 ) ? In respect of the complaint about that covert audio and video surveillance in the applicant ’ s workplace conducted by the investigative authorities on 25 November, 3 and 5 December 2014, did the applicant comply with the six-month time-limit prescribed by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?

2. Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against her, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Allan v. the United Kingdom , no. 48539/99, §§ 45-53, ECHR 2002-IX)? In particular, did the admission of the recording of the applicant ’ s conversations obtained through the covert audio and video surveillance of her office comply with the guarantees of Article 6 § 1? Did the applicant have an opportunity to examine such evidence?

Application no. 34980/18

Has there been a violation of the applicant ’ s rights guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention as a result of the covert surveillance (see e.g., Akhlyustin v. Russia , no. 21200/05, 7 November 2017 and Zubkov and Others v. Russia , nos. 29431/05 and 2 others, 7 November 2017)? In respect of the complaint about that audio and video surveillance conducted by the investigative authorities on 8, 15 and 18 August 2016 during an undercover operation did the applicant comply with the six-month time-limit prescribed by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?

APPENDIX

No.

Application

no.

Lodged on

Applicant ’ s name

date of birth

place of residence

Represented by

Date (s) of operational experiment and offence

Domestic proceedings

62082/10

01/10/2010

Aleksandr Aleksandrovich

IVANOV

1975Kolomna

5 and 9 February 2010

Accepting a bribe in return for issuing a false sick-leave certificate

The Zheleznodorozhniy District Court of Oryel , 29 July 2010;

The Oryel Regional Court, 14 September 2010.

43918/11

07/06/2011

Nikolay Alekseyevich ISAYEV

1969St Petersburg

6 March 2010

Accepting a bribe in return for fabrication of an academic record

The Zavodskoy District Court of Oryel , 18 March 2011;

The Oryel Regional Court, 3 May 2011.

10093/12

13/01/2012

Vasiliy Nikolayevich ABRAMOV

1971Surovikino

16 and 18 February 2011

Accepting a bribe in return for issuing false veterinary documents

The Surovikinskiy District Court of Volgograd Region, 1 August 2011;

The Volgograd Regional Court, 12 September 2011.

53623/15

17/10/2015

Tatyana Sergeyevna ANDREYEVA

1984Ivanovo

Oleg Ivanovich

BIBIK

23 and 29 May 2014

Accepting a bribe in return for issuing a false sick-leave certificate

The Frunzensky district Court of Ivanovo, 10 February 2015;

The Ivanovskiy Regional Court, 21 April 2015.

13251/16

21/02/2016

Soat Dzhumanazarovich ERGASHEV

1950Cheboksary

29 April 2014

Accepting a bribe in return for issuing a false sick-leave certificate

Tsivilsky District Court of the Chuvash Republic, 18 May 2015;

The Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic, 07 July 2015.

33790/16

24/05/2016

Irina Aleksandrovna NETIKOVA

1981Stroitel

Yerlan Bulatovich

NAZAROV

27 May 2015

Bribing a police officer in return for termination of criminal proceedings

The Yakovlevskiy District Court 04 September 2015;

The Belgorod Regional Court, 09 December 2015.

7

31415/17

19/04/2017

Yelena Nikolayevna STEPANOVA

1976Kizilyurt

Konstantin Ilyich TEREKHOV

5 December 2014

Extortion of money for fraudulent customs clearance of goods

The Sovetskiy District Court of Makhachkala, 5 December 2016 ;

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Dagestan, 21 February 2017.

8

41104/17

05/06/2017

Andrey Sergeyevich AGIYEVICH

1979Birobidhzan

29 May, 30 July 2014 and 3 June 2014

Bribing a customs officer in return for customs clearance of goods

The Birobidzhan District Court of the Yevreyskaya Auto nomous Region, 15 August 2016;

The Court of Yevreyskaya Autonomous Region, 06 December 2016.

9

34980/18

19/07/2018

Mikhail Yuryevich ROMANOV

1976Prudy

Russian

Yevgeniy Guryevich RYUMIN

Between 1 December 2015 and 31 January 2016; 11 October 2016; 9 and 15 December 2016;

Accepting a bribe in return for aiding and abetting illegal commercial deforestation activities

The Sokolskiy District court of the Vologda Region, 06 December 2017;

The Vologda Regional Court, 26 March 2018.

10

47308/18

18/09/2018

Yevgeniy Vladimirovich NEDVIZHAYEV

1984Pyatigorsk

Russian

5 September 2015

Accepting a bribe in return for dropping administrative charges

The Pyatigorsk City Court of the Stavropol Region, 23 November 2017;

The Stavropol Regional Court, 20 April 2018.