Lexploria

Communicated on 14 May 2018

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 19147/08 Vladimir Ivanovich LAVRENTYEV against Russia and 6 other applications (see list appended)

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicants complained under Article 3 of the Convention that they had been subjected to ill-treatment by State officials and that the State failed to conduct an effective domestic investigation into those incidents. All of the applicants submitted that their attempts to initiate criminal investigation in connection with the incidents proved futile.

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 in contained in A ppendix no. 1. The reaction of the domestic authorities to the applicants ’ complaints is reflected in Appendix no. 2.

The table of cases:

No.

Application number

Introduction date

Name of the applicant(s) ; date of birth

place of residence

Represented by

1.

19147/08

15/03/2008

Vladimir Ivanovich LAVRENTYEV 02/11/1964 Aleksandriyskaya

2.

16608/10

11/03/2010

Aleksandr Aleksandrovich RAKHMANOV

12/12/1941

Kstovo

The applicant passed on on 28/04/2016, the case is pursued on his behalf by his son Mr Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Rakhmanov , born on 11/12/1970, residing in Kstovo .

COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE

3.

37356/10

01/06/2010

Ilya Vladimirovich MILCHAKOV

05/08/1982

Moscow

Russian

4.

40010/10

21/06/2010

Sergey Yuryevich PASYNKOV

22/05/1968

Yagul

5.

58843/10

06/09/2010

Vladimir Markovich CHIRLIN 18/10/1969 Bor

6.

62846/13

07/10/2013

Dmitriy Konstantinovich BELKIN 17/07/1971 Moscow

Roman Sergeyevich KARPINSKIY

7.

20013/17

22/02/2017

Rafael Damirovich SAFIN 03/01/1994 Kazan

Andrey Vladimirovich SUCHKOV

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. 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)?

2. 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)?

3. Did the authorities carry out an effective investigation, in compliance with the procedural obligation under A rticle 3 of the Convention (see Lyapin v. Russia , no. 46956/09, §§ 125-40, 24 July 2014), having regard to:

(a) the investigating authorities ’ refusals to open criminal cases and investigate the applicants ’ allegations of ill-treatment by the State officials, and the overruling of those refusals as unlawful and unsubstantiated by higher investigative authorities or courts, and

(b) the investigating authorities ’ inability to implement full investigative measures within the framework of the pre-investigation inquiries, before and/or after amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure introduced by Federal Law no. 23-FZ of 4 March 2013 , for example, confrontations, identification parades, searches, and so forth?

No

Application No. and Title

APPENDIX No. 1

Article 3 - Substantive aspect

ARREST

ALLEGED ILL – TREATMENT

EVIDENCE

Date / time

Region / town /street

Entity

Facts

Date / time

Location

Alleged Facts

Perpetrator(s)

Date

Doc Type

Authority

Description of Injuries

1.

19147/08

Lavrentyev v. Russia

19/04/2006

Nevinnomysk town, Stavropol Region

Kochubeevskoye Department of the Interior

Arrested on suspicion of robbery

During pre-trial detention, 03/07/2006

IVS Kochubeevskoye , Stavropol Region

Severe beatings for 1.5 hours

Police officers of the Kochubeev-skoye OVD

16/08/2006

Forensic examination report

Forensic Bureau of the Stavropol Region

Multiple injuries in the area of shoulder blade, ribs, tailbone, shin injury, bruises of the scrotum, left shoulder and the forearm, caused by the impact of the hard blunt object.

2.

16 608/10

Rakhmanov v. Russia

14/05/2009 morning

The applicant ’ s house

The applicant ’ s house was searched and the applicant was allegedly handcuffed, beaten, kicked with the legs on the stomach and head during the search. He was left handcuffed for 2 hours. The applicant ’ s wife managed to bite the police officer ’ s shoulder (convicted under Article 318 of the Criminal Code).

police officers, (OMON special forces)

14/05/ 2009

Forensic Medical Certificate M282

Forensic Bureau of Nizhegorod-skiy Region

Brain concussion, injuries on chest, shoulder, face, abdomen.

3.

37356/10

Milchakov

v. Russia

30/03/2009

City of Samara

Police unit on duty ( Leninskiy District ROVD)

30/03/2009- 01/04/2009

In the street, on police department premises ( Leninskiy District ROVD)

The applicant was arrested on the street at night in hot pursuit. He was allegedly drunk and resisted arrest .

Police agents

28/10/2009

Official report

IZ 63/1 Samara

Bruise on the right thigh; hematoma on scapula and the right shoulder, paraorbital hematoma; abrasions of soft tissues of face, bruise of the left ear-lobe, fracture of the nose bones; bruise of soft tissue of head.

4.

40010/10

Pasynkov

v. Russia

23/04/2009 -24/04/2009

District Police Unit Leninskiy (ROVD) of Izhevsk

Being handcuffed, the applicant was subjected to beatings on his head, arms and legs. The ill-treatment continued until 3 am, then restarted on 8 am the same day. The applicant was allegedly suffocated with plastic bag and gas mask.

5 police agents

05/11/2009

25/04/2009

29/04/2009

8/05/2009

Medical expert examination

Pre-trial detention intake record

Paramedic of Medical Unit

Investigator ’ s report

Medical Expert Examination Office

Pre-trial detention IVS

Medical Unit of pre-trial detention facility

Investigation Committee

Bruises on the left shoulder, back, thighs, left buttock.

Scratch under the left eye; hematoma on the left arm from shoulder to elbow, both tights.

Brain concussion, bruise of the utter surface of left shoulder.

Craniocerebral trauma effects; brain concussion; thorax contusion.

5.

58843/10

Chirlin v. Russia

30/06/2009 at 12:00

Tolyatti, when leaving his friend ’ s apartment

Police unit, Komso-molsky District of Tolyatti

Arrested on suspicion of drug dealing

After apprehension, but before the court sanctioned arrest

Department of the Interior of the Komsomol -sky District of Tolyatti

Violent blows over the body and head, with the hands handcuffed behind the back

Policeman Iv.

03/07/2009

Forensic examination report

Tolyatti Forensic Bureau

Bruise on the breast; abrasion on the right shin. These injuries resulted respectively from "the impact of blow or squeeze by the hard blunt object" and from the "sliding and pressing impact of a hard blunt object with irregular contact surface" "5-9 days before the examination".

6.

62846/13

Belkin v. Russia

24/10/2014

SIZO-2 Moscow

Before transportation from SIZO to the court hearing the applicant was suddenly beaten by disguised agents of special forces (convoy). 2 shots on head, 1 on the stomach, the applicant was overturned, 2 more shots by feet on stomach. Insults, the app. ’ s hands were pulled behind the back and tightly handcuffed.

Disguised convoy agents

24/10/2014

Act on physical injuries

SIZO-2, Moscow

hyperaemia, oedema from handcuffs

28/03/2012; 30/03/2012; 01/03/2013; 17/05/2013; 21/05/2013; 10/07/2013; 14/08/2013; 15/08/2013; 20/08/2013; 09/09/2013; 17/09/2013; 20/09/2013.

SIZO-1 Moscow

Several times the applicant refused to go for a walk and was forced to do it by the prison guards. He was dragged with his arms handcuffed behind his back, what caused multiple abrasions and bruises.

Prison guards

18/12/2013

Refusal to initiate criminal investigation

Investigator of Investigation Committee

Abrasion of front chest surface near mastoid, caused by sliding action of the solid blunt object, which did not cause long-lasting health damage. Traces of handcuffs use, with damage to the surface of epidermis. Abrasion of right knee. Pinpoint bruises of left cubital fossa . Pinpoint bruises of left and right shoulders (Not cumulative).

7.

20013/17

Safin v. Russia

16/08/2014 at 22:40

In the flat of his acquaintance, at 58, street Pobedy-73 and in the street

Local police officers of the Department of the Interior of the Republic of Tatarstan

After ill-treatment the applicant was delivered to police office no.9 " Safiullina " UMVD of the Republic of Tatarstan

16/08/2014 around midnight

In the street at the following address: 67 street Richard Zorge , during the pursuit of the applicant

The police officer repeatedly beat the applicant with his feet on the face and body, maintained in handcuffs on the floor, and in the car

Two police officers dressed in civilian clothing

17/08/2014, 18/08/2014, 20/04/2015; 01/06/2015; 07/08/2015; 09/10/2015; 28/07/2016

Medical certificate, forensic medical report no. 1008/28, forensic medical reports during the preliminary inquiry

Republican Clinical hospital, Kazan, Republican forensic expertise office

Bruises on the face (eaves of the right eye and right frontal part), bruises on the left chest, abrasion of the right stifle joint

No

Application No.

and 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.

19147/08

Lavrentyev v. Russia

06/07/2016

Prosecutor ’ s office of the Kochubeyevsk District of the Stavropol Region

Consistently refused

07/07/2016

The authorities, recognizing existence of injuries, failed to suggest any plausible explanation of their causes and refused to initiate criminal proceedings against police officers. Refusals were quashed by the authorities at least 16 times. Last refusal was upheld by the Kochubeyevskiy District Court of the Stavropol Region on 15/01/2010.

It seems that investigation was carried out without due diligence, no explanation as for the nature and mechanism of injuries suggested.

2.

16 608/10

Rakhmanov v. Russia

2/06/2009

Police Office

Consistently refused

24/06/2009,

01/07/2009,

22/03/2013,

22/03/2014.

Complaint under Article 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was dismissed on 23/10/2009 on cassation bv the Nizhegorodskiy Regional Court. The applicant received a compensation for non-pecuniary damage for ineffective investigation (RUB 10 000, around 150 euro) on 09/07/2015 ( Nizhegorodskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod).

The following alleged defects in the inquiry: no proper forensic expertise, no cross-examinations of witnesses, no examination of OMON officers, failure quickly to launch criminal investigation (delay of some 3 years and 10 months) were acknowledged in domestic award on 09/07/2015.

3.

37356/10

Milchakov v. Russia

31/03/2009

unclear

Investigation Unit of Leninskiy District OVD of Samara;

Kuybyshevskiy Interdistrict Investigation unit of Samara

Zheleznodorozhny District Court

Samara Regional Court

Consistently refused

31/03/2009

15/06/2009

29/07/2009

30/09/2009

Refusal to open criminal investigation. Appeal under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code dismissed.

4.

40010/10

Pasynkov v. Russia

20/09/2009

unclear

Investigation Committee

Courts

Consistently refused

07/05/2009; 28/05/2009; 2/11/2009; 25/01/20 10; 12/11/2010; 09/08/2010; 19/08/2011;

06/05/2011; 09/08/2011; 11/12/2011.

7 refusals to open criminal investigation in courts ( Leninskiy District Court and Supreme Court of Udmurtiya ) dismissed the applicant ’ s claim.

5.

58843/10

Chirlin v. Russia

15/07/2009

Prosecutor ’ s Office of Tolyatti

Consistently refused

05/04/2010

The Investigative Committee several times refused to open investigation. The applicant challenged refusal in the national court, but to no avail (Decision of the Komsomolsky District Court of Tolyatti of 29/01/2010), as the decision to refuse to open an investigation was quashed by the investigator just before the hearing. The Investigator again refused to open an investigation on 05/04/2010. This decision was quashed by the prosecutor on 17/02/2011. The decision to refuse to open an investigation was many times quashed. Challenging the decision in court did not bring any results. No due examination of the applicant ’ s complaints.

6.

62846/13

Belkin v. Russia

10/09/2013

Investigation Committee (SK)

Consistently refused

18/12/2013

The preliminary investigation came to conclusion, that the use of physical power was proven, but found necessary and lawful, thus no criminal investigation was opened.

12/11/2014

Investigation Committee (SK)

Consistently refused

Last decision: 15/04/15 Appeal Moscow City Court

The applicant ’ s claim under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code was not granted.

Appeal, Moscow City Court

Consistently refused

01/10/2014

The appeal court supported the 1st instance court decision to dismiss the applicant ’ s claim under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

7.

20013/17

Safin v. Russia

27/08/2014

The Investigation Division of the Investigation Committee of the Republic of Tatarstan

Criminal Investigation

04/02/2015;

05/10/2016

On 5/10/2016 the criminal investigation was closed. Refusal under Article 125 –

On 3/11/2016 Sovetskiy District Court of Kazan, upheld on appeal on 23/12/2016 Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan .

According to the authorities the criminal proceedings were closed due to the absence of a crime; the police offices did not abuse their powers, as “the applicant did not receive significant injuries”

Menu

LAVRENTYEV v. RUSSIA and 6 other applications

LAVRENTYEV v. RUSSIA and 6 other applications

LEXI