Communicated on 14 January 2020

Published on 3 February 2020

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 27766/19 Gogita Anzorovich GVISHIANI against Russia lodged on 26 April 2019

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Gogita Anzorovich Gvishiani , is a stateless person, who was born in 1967 and is detained in Chita, the Zabaykalskiy Region. He is represented before the Court by Ms M. Sheykina , a lawyer practising in Chita.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant was placed in custody pending criminal proceedings against him. His detention was extended on a number of times.

On 25 September 2017 the applicant began studying the case materials. On 13 July 2018 the maximum eighteen-month period of pre-trial detention expired.

On 4 July, 8 August and 14 November 2018 the Zabaykalskiy Regional Court extended the applicant ’ s detention relying on Article 109 § 7 of the Criminal Procedure Code (“ CCrP ”) which allowed extending detention period in excess of the maximum period of eighteen months for the defendant to study the case-file.

The applicant appealed against the extension order of 14 November 2018. He submitted that Article 109 § 7 allowed just one, but not multiple, extensions on that ground. On 28 November 2018 his appeal was dismissed. His argument concerning the prohibition of multiple extensions was not addressed.

On 13 February 2019 the Zabaykalskiy Regional Court extended the applicant ’ s detention based on Article 109 § 7 of the CCrP for a further three months. On 22 February 2019 the extension order was upheld on appeal.

See the relevant domestic law and practice in the case of Suslov v. Russia , no. 2366/07, §§ 51 - 58 and §§ 63 - 68, 29 May 2012.

On 7 January 2019 a new amendment of the CCrP entered into force. Article 109 § 8 (1) was supplemente d by the following phrase: “... Extension of detention period on the grounds set by Article 109 § 7 of the CCrP is permissible for not more than three months each time”.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention that his detention exceeding the statutory eighteen-month limit is unlawful un der the national law as Article 109 § 7 of the CCrP does not allow multiple extensions.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Having regard to the Court ’ s finding of a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention on account of multiple extensions of the detention period for the purpose of allowing the defendant to study the case-file (see Tsarenko v. Russia , no. 5235/09, §§ 60 - 61, 3 March 2011, and Suslov v. Russia , no. 2366/07, §§ 78 - 79, 29 May 2012), was the applicant ’ s detention compatible with the requirements of Article 5 § 1 –

(a) In the period from 8 August 2018 to 7 January 2019?

(b) In the period after 7 January 2019?