FREDRIKSEN v. RUSSIA and 7 other applications
Doc ref: 15476/08;60844/11;43067/13;70960/14;53922/15;48809/18 • ECHR ID: 001-203137
Document date: May 20, 2020
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 4
Communicated on 20 May 2020 Published on 15 June 2020
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 15476/08 Adam FREDRIKSEN against Russia and 5 other applications – see appended list
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicants complained under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention that they had been subjected to ill-treatment by State officials and that the State had failed to conduct an effective domestic investigation into those incidents. All of the applicants submitted that the investigations in connection with the incidents proved futile. Mr Daurbekov (no. 60844/11) and Mr Chibiyev (no. 70960/14) also complained under Article 5 of the Convention about their unrecorded detention following their respective arrests.
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 aspect of Article 3 is contained in Appendix No. 1. The reaction of the domestic authorities to the applicants ’ complaints is reflected in Appendix No. 2.
Table of case s:
No.
Case name
Application No.
Lodged on
Applicant
Year of Birth
Place of Residence
Nationality
Represented by
1Fredriksen v. Russia
15476/08
13/03/2008
Adam FREDRIKSEN [1]
1979Oslo
Norwegian
STICHTING RUSSIAN JUSTICE INITIATIVE
2Daurbekov v. Russia
60844/11
22/09/2011
Aslanbek DAURBEKOV
1979Achkhoy-Martan
Russian
Igor Aleksandrovich KALYAPIN
3Akhmedov v. Russia
43067/13
24/06/2013
Alikhan AKHMEDOV
1984Grozny
Russian
Igor Aleksandrovich KALYAPIN
4Chibiyev v. Russia
70960/14
03/11/2014
Maskhud CHIBIYEV
1990Pliyevo
Russia
STICHTING RUSSIAN JUSTICE INITIATIVE
5Berov v. Russia
53922/15
23/10/2015
Inal BEROV
1983Nalchik
Russian
Vanessa KOGAN
6Ugurchiyev v. Russia
48809/18
01/10/2018
Ruslan UGURCHIYEV
1980Nazran
Russian
Boris Mikhaylovich PUGOYEV
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1 . a) Having regard to the injuries found on the applicants after the time spent by them in State custody, have the applicants been subjected to torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Razzakov v. Russia , no. 57519/09, 5 February 2015; Gorshchuk v. Russia , no. 31316/09, 6 October 2015; Turbylev v. Russia , no. 4722/09, 6 October 2015; Fartushin v. Russia , no. 38887/09, 8 October 2015; Aleksandr Andreyev v. Russia , no. 2281/06, 23 February 2016; and Leonid Petrov v. Russia , no. 52783/08, 11 October 2016)?
b) Have the authorities discharged their burden of proof by providing a plausible or satisfactory and convincing explanation of how the applicants ’ injuries were caused (see Selmouni , cited above, § 87, and Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000 ‑ VII and Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, § 83 and further, ECHR 2015)?
c) Did the authorities carry out an effective investigation, in compliance with the procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention (see Lyapin v. Russia , no. 46956/09, §§ 125-40, 24 July 2014)?
2 . In the cases of Mr Daurbekov (no. 60844/11) and Mr Chibiyev (no. 70960/14), as regards their allegations of unrecorded detention, were they deprived of their liberty, within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? If such detention took place, was it compatible with the guarantees of Article 5 §§ 1-5 of the Convention?
3 . In the cases of Mr Fredriksen (no. 15476/08), Mr Daurbekov (no. 60844/11), Mr Akhmedov (no. 43067/13), Mr Chibiyev (no. 70960/14), Mr Ugurchiyev (no. 48809/18), did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaints under Article 3, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?
No
Application No. and Title
APPENDIX No. 1
Article 3 - Substantive aspect
ARREST
ALLEGED ILL-TREATMENT
EVIDENCE
Date
Time
Facts
Region
Town Location
Entity
Date
Time
Location
Alleged Facts
Perpetrator(s)
Date
Doc Type
Authority
Description of Injuries
1.
15476/08
Fredriksen v. Russia
11/05/2005
At about 5 a.m. during a special operation
Chechnya, Grozny
The applicant ’ s house
Leninskiy Temporary Department of the Interior (VOVD)
11/05/2005-13/05/2005
09/06/2005-15/06/2005
13/12/2005-19/12/2005
27/01/2006-03/02/2006
Operational-Search Division of the North Caucasus Operations Department
(ORB-2)
Electrocuted, beaten with wooden sticks, strangled with a gas mask, forced to inhale liquid ammonia, burned with cigarette butts, forced to confess
ORB-2 officers M. and Yu.
27/05/2005
Extract from the medical card
Remand prison no. 20/1, Grozny
Pain all over the body. Two marks from cigarette butts, crust on his legs, left knee-joint, hematoma on his leg. A scar on his head allegedly from beatings. Complaints about deterioration of the eyesight caused by beatings in ORB-2
25/05/2006
Forensic medical examination act no. 430
Forensic Bureau of the Chechen Republic
Injuries described in the medical card confirmed. Besides that, the applicant had a post-traumatic contusion of both eyes and post-traumatic encephalopathy due to a brain injury, which could be caused in the circumstances described by the applicant
2.
60844/11
Daurbekov v. Russia
14/05/2010
Arrest record drawn up on 16/05/2010
Chechnya, Achkhoy-Martan
Achkhoy-Martanovskiy Department of the Interior (ROVD)
14/05/2010-15/05/2010
17/05/2010
Achkhoy-Martanovskiy ROVD
Punched and kicked, insulted, deprived of food and water. He was tied and hung in the air by his arms. He was forced to confess
Officers A., I., Me.
Officers D., S., Ma., Ya.
25/05/2010
Forensic medical examination act no. 108
Forensic Bureau of the Chechen Republic
Numerous bruises and abrasions on his left shoulder, left thigh, both shins, caused within 3-5 days before the examination
3.
43067/13
Akhmedov v. Russia
19/11/2007
At about 6 p.m.
Chechnya, Grozny
Public place
Special police forces of the Chechen Ministry of the Interior (OMON)
19/11/2007
OMON headquarters in Grozny
The officers tied the applicant ’ s hand behind his back, hung up with a rope, punched and kicked him on the body, burned with cigarette butts. Then they handcuffed him to a radiator in a basement, where he was again beaten. He was forced to confess
OMON officers U. and K.
30/11/2007
Forensic medical examination act no. 1837
Forensic Bureau of the Chechen Republic
A bruise under his left eye, abrasions in the cheekbone area, shoulders, on both shins, caused by a hard blunt object caused within the period indicated in the investigator ’ s order (21/11/2007)
4.
70960/14
Chibiyev v. Russia
29/10/2014
At about 7 a.m.
Arrest record drawn up at 9 p.m. on 30/10/2014
Pliyevo, Ingushetia
The applicant ’ s house
Department of the Interior in Nazran ( ОМВД по г . Назрань )
29/10/2014-30/10/2014
Unknown location
About six officers kicked and punched him, especially in the groin area, strangled with a plastic bag, forced him to confess
Unidentified law-enforcement officers
30/10/2014
Record on administrative arrest
On-duty police officer
A bruise on the face
02/12/2014
Forensic medical examination act no. 1138
(no copy)
Unknown
Contusion of the left feet, inflicted within one month before the examination
5.
53922/15
Berov v. Russia
06/03/2012
At about 6.30 p.m.
Kabardino-Balkar Republic (KBR) , Nalchik
The applicant ’ s workplace
Ministry of Internal Affairs of the KBR ( МВД по КБÐ )
06/03/2012-07/03/2012
Premises of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of KBR ( МВД по КБÐ )
The officers tied the applicant, kicked and punched him, electrocuted him, threatened him with rape and AIDS infection, forced him to confess. He was released on 07/03/2012
Police officers Kh. and O.
14/03/2012
Forensic medical examination act no. 172-A
Forensic Bureau of the Kabardino-Balkar Republic
Fracture of the third lumbar vertebra, closed craniocerebral injury, qualified as medium harm; contusion of the thorax, bruises on the soft tissues of his head, face and upper and lower limbs, qualified as light harm; caused within one day before the examination on 07/03/2012
6.
48809/18
Ugurchiyev v. Russia
19/02/2017
At about 7.20 a.m.
Ingushetia, Nazran
The applicant ’ s house
Anti - extremism centre in Ingushetia ( Центр по противодействую экстремизму МВД России по Ингушетии)
19/02/2017
Police department in Nazran, then the premises of the anti - extremism centre
The officers did not beat the applicant, but tied and blindfolded him, electrocuted by little toes, poured cold water, rotated on the chair, threatened with rape, forced to confess. He was held in a temporary detention facility for 10 days
Officers Al., As., Ya., Ar., M.
19/02/2017
Ambulance medical card no. 5367
Ambulance
Crust under the right kneecap
26/04/2017
Forensic medical examination act no. 156
Forensic Bureau of the Republic of Ingushetia
No injuries related to the incident of 19/02/2017, possibly due to lapse of time
No
Application no.
Title
APPENDIX No. 2
Article 3 - Procedural aspect
DOMESTIC COMPLAINT AND THE GOVERNMENT REACTION
Date of Complaint
Authority
Type of Reaction
Date(s)
Procedural Outcome
1.
15476/08
Fredriksen v. Russia
20/05/2005
22/06/2005
Prosecution office of the Leninskiy District in Grozny
Refusal to open a criminal case
25/05/2005
02/05/2006
17/07/2006
First refusal of 25/05/2005 (allegations of ill-treatment unfounded). On 14/04/2006 the trial court ordered an additional inquiry, which resulted in the refusal of 02/05/2006 (allegations of ill-treatment unsubstantiated). On 27/06/2006 the court again ordered an inquiry, which resulted in the refusal of 17/07/2006. On 29/01/2007 the Supreme Court of Chechnya acquitted the applicant on the grounds that his confession statements had been obtained under duress. On 13/09/2007 the Supreme Court of Russia quashed the acquittal and remitted the case for a new examination. It found the court ’ s finding regarding duress unsubstantiated, referring to the refusals to open a criminal case.
2.
60844/11
Daurbekov v. Russia
27/05/2010
Report on the discovery of evidence of crime ( рапорт об обнаружении признаков преступления )
Inter-district Investigation Department in Achkhoy-Martan
Refusal to open a criminal case
11/06/2010
16/08/2010
The applicant ’ s allegations of ill-treatment and unrecorded detention were dismissed as unfounded: the applicant was in the police station before his official arrest and he stayed voluntarily there. On 14/09/2010 the Achkhoy-Martanovskiy District Court dismissed the complaint against the refusal of 11/06/2010 since it had already been quashed by that time. On 18/03/2011 the Urus-Martanovskiy District Court dismissed the complaint against the refusal of 16/08/2010 since the criminal case against the applicant was pending. On 04/05/2011 the decision was upheld on appeal.
On 27/01/2011 the Achkhoy-Martanovskiy District Court convicted the applicant. On 23/03/2011 the Supreme Court of Chechnya upheld the conviction.
3.
43067/13
Akhmedov v. Russia
20/11/2007
22/11/2007
Reports on the discovery of evidence of crime
Zavodskoy Inter-district Investigation Department in Grozny
A criminal case for abuse of power was opened, then suspended and resumed multiple times
03/12/2007-
30/12/2016
03/12/2007 a criminal case was opened. On 10/01/2008 the applicant was granted victim status. The case was suspended and resumed for at least 13 times between 03/03/2008 and 30/12/2016 for the failure to identify perpetrators. The investigator ’ s requests to the Minister of Internal Affairs to facilitate the appearance of OMON officers for interviews were unsuccessful.
On 12/02/2013 the Leninskiy District Court rejected the applicant ’ s complaint against the decisions to extend the time limits of the investigation and investigators ’ inactivity.
On 19/03/2013 the Supreme Court of Chechnya rejected the applicant ’ s appeal.
4.
70960/14
Chibiyev v. Russia
11/11/2014
Inter-district Investigation Department in Nazran
Refusal to open a criminal case
11/12/2014
28/04/2015
On 19/03/2015 the Magasskiy District Court declared the refusal of 11/12/2014 unreasoned and unlawful.
On 27/04/2016 the Supreme Court of Ingushetia acquitted the applicant. On 14/07/2016 the Supreme Court of Russia quashed the acquittal. No further information.
5.
53922/15
Berov v. Russia
06/03/2007
(the applicant ’ s father ’ s complaint)
07/03/2007
(r eport on the discovery of evidence of crime)
Investigation Department in Nalchik
A criminal case for abuse of power was opened, then suspended and resumed multiple times
04/04/2012-
01/11/2014
On 04/04/2012 a criminal case was opened. It was suspended and resumed for at least five times between 04/04/2013 and 01/11/2014 for the failure to identify perpetrators.
On 25/06/2013 and 10/04/2014 a criminal case against officers Kh. and O. was refused.
On 07/12/2015 the applicant complained to the Nalchik City Court about the inactivity of the investigative authorities.
On 30/12/2015 the court granted the claim and declared the refusals and the latest decision to suspend the investigation of 01/11/2014 unfounded and unlawful.
6.
48809/18
Ugurchiyev v. Russia
10/03/2017
Investigation Department in Nazran
Refusal to open a criminal case
10/05/2017
10/09/2017
11/01/2018
On 04/12/2017 the Magasskiy District Court declared the refusal of 10/09/2017 unlawful.
On 29/01/2018 the Magasskiy District Court dismissed the applicant ’ s complaint against the refusal of 11/01/2018. On 03/04/2018 the Supreme Court of Ingushetia dismissed the appeal.
[1] Mr Fredriksen was a Russian national and he lived in Chechnya at the time of the events. In 2016 he obtained Norwegian citizenship and changed his name.