Communicated on 11 January 2011

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 31694/06 Eduard Valeryevich MEDYANIKOV against Ukraine lodged on 17 July 2006

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Eduard Valeryevich Medyanikov , is a Ukrainian national , who was born in 1972 and is currently serving a prison sentence in Vinnytsya .

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

On 25 November 2004 the Donetsk Regional Court of Appeal convicted the applicant of several crimes and sentenced him to life imprisonment with confiscation of all his property. On 23 February 2006 the Supreme Court upheld that judgment with certain changes.

Since 26 August 2003 the applicant has been detained in different detention facilities initially pending the criminal investigation against him as well as his trial, and subsequently as having been sentenced to life imprisonment.

On 25 January 2007 the applicant was diagnosed with tuberculosis while he was detained at a temporary detention facility in Donetsk (SIZO No. 5).

On 16 March 2007 the applicant was transferred to Ladyzhyn Correctional Colony No.39.

In December 2011 a blood test revealed that the applicant had hepatitis C. The applicant was denied access to copies of the test results. A subsequent blood test carried out in May 2012 confirmed the diagnosis.

Allegedly, no adequate medical treatment has been provided to the applicant, of which he complained to the Prosecutor General ’ s Office. No reply was given to his complaint of inadequate medical treatment.

During his detention the applicant submitted numerous applications to the domestic authorities, including the Donetsk Regional Court of Appeal, seeking to obtain copies of different documents in order to submit to the Court in substantiation of his application.

In particular, between August and November 2006 the applicant requested the Donetsk Regional Court of Appeal to provide him with a copy of his indictment. His requests were refused on the grounds that the applicant had already been provided with a copy of that document in the course of the criminal proceedings against him and that there was no legal provision to meet his requests. Eventually, on 21 July 2008 a copy of that document was sent to the applicant.

Between April and August 2009 the applicant requested the Donetsk Regional Court of Appeal to send him copies of several courts records from his criminal case file as well as from that of his accomplice. Those requests were initially refused as not based on the law. On 21 April 2011 copies of the requested documents were sent to the applicant.

By letters dated 12 and 17 January 2017, the Donetsk Regional Court of Appeal refused the applicant ’ s applications for copies of his request for the renewal of time-limit for lodging a cassation appeal against his conviction of 25 November 2004 and of a court ruling of 26 October 2016 dismissing that request. The Donetsk Regional Court of Appeal noted that the applicant ’ s criminal case file had been sent to the Higher Specialized Court of Ukraine for Civil and Criminal Matters upon the latter court ’ s request. The applicant has not been provided with a copy of the requested documents.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention of having been infected with tuberculosis and hepatitis C and of inadequate medical care while in detention in Ladyzhyn Correctional Colony No. 39.

Relying on Article 34 of the Convention, the applicant complains that the national authorities hindered his access to his criminal case file which made for substantiation of his application before the Court.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the applicant ’ s complaints that while in detention he has contracted tuberculosis and hepatitis C and has not been provided with adequate medical treatment as regards those illnesses?

2. Has there been any hindrance by the State in the present case with the effective exercise of the applicant ’ s right of application, ensured by Article 34 of the Convention, on account of the applicant ’ s alleged difficulties in obtaining copies of documents which he wished to submit in support of his application before the Court after the termination of the criminal proceedings against him?