Communicated on 7 February 2017

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 23806/13 Volodymyr Stanislavovych SHCHUKIN against Ukraine lodged on 29 January 2013

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Volodymyr Stanislavovych Shchukin , is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1971 and lives in Boguslav .

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

On 16 March 2010 in the evening the applicant was stopped in the street by two police officers. According to him, they used excessive force to handcuff him, making him bend forward abruptly and kneel, and twisting his arms behind him.

According to the officers, the applicant was drinking, cursing and behaving in a disorderly fashion in the street. When they attempted to reason with him he behaved aggressively, and started grabbing at their service weapons and trying to get away. They handcuffed him, but without bending him forward.

The applicant was detained for about two hours and then released without any charge.

Next morning he sought medical help for back pain and was diagnosed with a spinal compression fracture, classified as bodily harm of medium gravity. Subsequent expert medical analysis indicated that the fracture was more consistent with the applicant ’ s account than that of the officers.

On 9 August 2010 the prosecutor ’ s office instituted criminal proceedings against the officers for exceeding their authority in using excessive force against the applicant.

The criminal case against the officers was sent for trial, but on 15 March 2012 the Makiyivka Gornyatsky District Court remitted the case for further investigation, on the grounds that there were apparent contradictions between the expert medical evidence and the description of the officers ’ actions in the indictment.

On 28 August 2012 the Donetsk Regional Court of Appeal upheld the district court ’ s ruling.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention that he was ill-treated by the police and that his complaint of ill-treatment was not investigated properly.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?

2. Having regard to the procedural protection from inhuman or degrading treatment (see paragraph 131 of Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, ECHR 2000-IV), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?