Communicated on 5 November 2015

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 57335/13 Dmitriy Alekseyevich DUBOVIKOV against Russia and 5 other applications (see list appended)

The applicants are Russian nationals.

The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

1. Application no. 57335/13 was lodged on 13 August 2013 by Dmitriy Alekseyevich Dubovikov who was born on 20 March 1985 and who is currently serving a prison sentence in a correctional colony in the Murmansk Region.

A. Facts

On 3 April 2013 the Pervomayskiy District Court of Murmansk convicted the applicant of a drug offence and sentenced him to ten years ’ imprisonment. Throughout the trial the applicant was confined in a metal cage in the courtroom.

On 20 June 2013 the Murmansk Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal.

B. Complaint

The applicant complained, among other matters, that his confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom before the trial court had amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment prohibited by Article 3 of the Convention.

2. Application no. 42645/14 was lodged on 26 May 2014 by Mikhail Vladimirovich Chupov who was born on 27 March 1973 and who is currently serving a prison sentence in a correctional colony in the Vladimir Region.

A. Facts

On 16 July 2012 the Ostankinskiy District Court of Moscow convicted the applicant on several counts of embezzlement and sentenced him to five years ’ imprisonment.

On an unspecified date criminal proceedings were instituted against the applicant on suspicion of other offences of embezzlement committed between 2006 and 2009.

During the preliminary hearing on 9 September 2013 the applicant fully accepted the charges brought against him, admitted that he had intended to commit, and was guilty of, the crimes he was charged with, and requested that the proceedings be conducted without a hearing under Article 40 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

On 17 September 2013 the Meshchanskiy District Court of Moscow (“the District Court”) scheduled the pronouncement of the judgment for 19 September 2013. The applicant ’ s lawyer asked, without success, to reschedule the pronouncement of the judgment as he had a prior engagement on that date.

On 19 September 2013 the District Court convicted the applicant on several counts of embezzlement and abuse of position and sentenced him to seven years ’ imprisonment taking into account that the applicant had not fully served the sentence imposed on 16 July 2012. Neither the applicant ’ s lawyer nor the prosecutor was present at the pronouncement of the judgment. The pronouncement of the judgment lasted three hours, and the applicant was seated in the metal cage in an extremely painful and uncomfortable position with his hands handcuffed behind his back. The applicant ’ s request to be either allowed to stand up or to remove the handcuffs was ignored.

The applicant appealed. He complained, in particular, about his lawyer not having been present and about having been held in the metal cage with his hands handcuffed behind his back during the pronouncement of the judgment.

On 27 November 2013 the Moscow City Court upheld the judgment on appeal. The court held that the applicant ’ s lawyer had been informed about the time and the venue of the pronouncement of the judgment but had failed to appear; therefore the applicant ’ s right to defence had not been violated. It further held that since the applicant had been in pre-trial detention and had been brought to the courtroom by convoy, his having been held in the metal cage had not amounted to a violation of his rights either. The court remained silent about the applicant ’ s handcuffing during the pronouncement of the judgment.

On 18 December 2013 a judge of the Moscow City Court decided not to refer the case for consideration by its Presidium.

B. Complaint

The applicant complained, among other matters, under Article 3 of the Convention, that during the pronouncement of the judgment he had been confined in a metal cage and had been ordered to remain seated there with his hands handcuffed behind his back, which had been extremely uncomfortable, painful and humiliating.

3. Application no. 59655/14 was lodged on 3 October 2014 by Ruslan Vladimirovich Vorontsov who was born on 7 December 1977 and who lived before his conviction in Krasnoyarsk.

A. Facts

On 3 May 2013 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of having committed a crime. The applicant was handcuffed and searched. He was placed in the temporary detention facility at the police station, where he remained between 3 and 8 May, 20 and 24 May, and 27 and 28 May 2013 in allegedly appalling conditions.

In the meantime, on 4 May 2013 the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk (“the District Court”) remanded the applicant in custody.

On 11 June and 11 November 2013, and 14 February 2014 the District Court extended the applicant ’ s detention until 30 November 2013, 28 February and 28 May 2014 respectively.

During the hearings before the trial court on 11 June, 26 July, 1 October, and 11 November 2013, and 14 February, 14, 21 and 27 March, and 2, 3 and 4 April 2014 the applicant was held in a metal cage.

On 4 April 2014 the District Court convicted the applicant of robbery and sentenced him to three years and six months ’ imprisonment.

The applicant lodged an appeal with the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court.

He has not informed the Court of the outcome of the appeal proceedings.

B. Complaint

The applicant complained, among other matters, under Article 3 of the Convention, about his confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom before the trial court, which was particularly humiliating for him as his wife and underage children were present.

4. Application no. 63954/14 was lodged on 10 November 2014 by Vladislav Yevgenyevich Raschupkin who was born on 27 April 1988 and who lived before his conviction in Krasnoyarsk.

A. Facts

1. Criminal proceedings against the applicant

On 1 February 2012 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of having committed a crime. He was placed in a temporary detention facility at the police station.

On 3 February 2012 the Rybinskiy District Court of the Krasnoyarsk Region remanded the applicant in custody. The custodial measure was subsequently extended by the Rybinskiy District Court on 29 March, 30 July, 13 September, 18 October and 17 December 2012, and by the Kanskiy District Court on 30 January and 25 April 2013.

Between 1 and 8 February 2012 the applicant was allegedly beaten up and raped by his cellmates to force his confession.

At a later date the investigator allegedly put pressure on the applicant threatening him with being returned to the temporary detention facility at the police station.

On 16 May 2014 the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court convicted the applicant on several counts of premeditated armed burglary, theft of firearms and attempted theft, while part of an organised group, and sentenced him to ten years ’ imprisonment.

On numerous occasions between 3 February 2012 and 16 May 2014, when the issue of preventive measures was being examined, and during the trial the applicant was confined in a metal cage at the Rybinskiy District Court, the Kanskiy District Court and the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court.

On 28 November 2014 the Supreme Court of Russia upheld the conviction on appeal.

2. Investigation into the alleged ill-treatment

In October 2013 the applicant complained to the prosecutor ’ s office of his alleged ill-treatment in February 2012.

On 11 November 2013 the deputy head of the Rybinskiy district investigations department decided not to institute criminal proceedings into the applicant ’ s allegations of ill-treatment.

On 22 May 2014 the Rybinksiy District Court terminated the proceedings with reference to the applicant ’ s conviction of 16 May 2014.

On 14 August 2014 the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court set aside the decision of 22 May 2014 and remitted the case-file material to the Rybinskiy District Court for a fresh examination.

On 30 September 2014 the Rybinskiy District Court remitted the case file to the Borodinskiy Town Court of the Krasnoyarsk Region, which had territorial jurisdiction over the case.

Meanwhile, on 19 October 2014 the head of the Rybinskiy district investigations department set aside the decision of 11 November 2013 refusing the institution of criminal proceedings into the applicant ’ s allegations of ill-treatment and remitted the case file for an additional pre-investigation inquiry.

On 26 November 2014, having taken into consideration the above decision of 19 October 2014, the Borodinskiy Town Court terminated the proceedings.

There is no further information in the case file as to the outcome of the pre-investigation inquiry.

B. Complaint

The applicant complained, among other matters, under Article 3 of the Convention, about his confinement in a metal cage on numerous occasions between 3 February 2012 and 16 May 2014 in the courtrooms of the Rybinskiy and the Kanskiy District Courts and the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court during the examination of the issue of preventive measures and during the trial, which humiliated him and caused him mental distress.

5. Application no. 5771/15 was lodged on 24 December 2014 by Aleksandr Nikolayevich Susarin who was born on 15 June 1972 and who lived before his conviction in Cheboksary.

A. Facts

On 30 June 2011 the Novocheboksarsk Town Court of the Chuvash Republic convicted the applicant of embezzlement and illegal acquisition, storage, transfer, transportation and possession of firearms and sentenced him to four years ’ imprisonment.

On 11 February 2013 the Leninskiy District Court of Cheboksary convicted the applicant of fraud committed through abuse of position and sentenced him to a fine.

On 1 August 2013 the Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic reduced the fine to be paid by the applicant.

On 18 October 2013, however, the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic granted the cassation appeal filed by the Prosecutor of the Chuvash Republic and quashed the judgment of 11 February 2013 and the appeal decision of 1 August 2013. The case was remitted to the Leninskiy District Court for fresh examination.

On 29 April 2014 the Leninskiy District Court convicted the applicant on nine counts of fraud, acquitted him on a further four counts of fraud and sentenced him to seven years ’ imprisonment taking into account that the applicant had not fully served the sentence imposed on 30 June 2011.

On 25 June 2014 the Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic reclassified the nine counts of fraud on which the applicant had been convicted and sentenced him to seven years ’ imprisonment. As regards the four counts of fraud on which the applicant had been acquitted, the Supreme Court quashed the judgment on appeal and remitted the case for fresh examination. These proceedings are currently pending.

B. Complaint

The applicant complained, among other matters, that his confinement in a metal cage in the courtrooms during proceedings before the courts in 2014 had amounted to degrading treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

6. Application no. 7238/15 was lodged on 26 January 2015 by Yevgeniy Vladimirovich Belyayev who was born on 21 September 1987 and who lived before his conviction in the Vologda Region.

A. Facts

On 16 September 2014 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of having committed a crime.

On 17 September 2014 the Cherepovets Town Court of the Vologda Region remanded the applicant in custody. The applicant was confined in a metal cage during proceedings before the court.

On 10 November 2014 the Cherepovets Town Court extended the applicant ’ s detention. The applicant was again confined in the metal cage.

On 12 December 2014 the Cherepovets Town Court convicted the applicant of infliction of grievous bodily harm and sentenced him to three years ’ imprisonment. The applicant was again held in the metal cage.

B. Complaint

The applicant complained, under Article 3 of the Convention, that his confinement in a metal cage during proceedings before the Cherepovets Town Court on 17 September, 10 November and 12 December 2014 had amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment.

RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW AND PRACTICE

For a summary of relevant domestic law and practice and relevant international material and practice see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08 , § § 53-76 , ECHR 2014 (extracts).

COMMON QUESTIONS

1. Were the applicants subjected to degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of their confinement in a metal cage during the criminal proceedings against them (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08 , §§ 113-39, ECHR 2014 (extracts))?

2. The Government are invited to provide a detailed description and photographs of the metal cages used to confine the applicants in the courtrooms concerned.

CASE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

Application no. 42645/14

1. Did the applicant comply with the six-month time-limit, imposed by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, for lodging his complaint under Article 3 about his confinement in a metal cage during the trial? In particular, should the applicant have been aware of the ineffectiveness of the judicial avenue he had made use of before he lodged his complaint?

2. Was the applicant subjected to degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of his being handcuffed during the pronouncement of the judgment (see Gorodnitchev v. Russia , no. 52058/99, § § 98-109 , 24 May 2007)? Was the recourse to handcuffing necessary in the circumstances of the present case? In particular, was it justified by the applicant ’ s behaviour or for security reasons, given that the applicant was at the same time confined in a metal cage?

Application no. 5771/15

Did the applicant comply with the six-month time-limit, imposed by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, for lodging his complaint under Article 3 about his confinement in a metal cage during the trial? In particul ar , did the applicant ’ s confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom during the trial and at the appeal hearing constitute a “continuing situation” (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev [GC], cited above, § 86)?

APPENDIX

No.

Application

no.

Lodged on

Applicant name

date of birth

57335/13

13/08/2013

Dmitriy Alekseyevich DUBOVIKOV

20/03/1985

42645/14

26/05/2014

Mikhail Vladimirovich CHUPOV

27/03/1973

59655/14

03/10/2014

Rulsan Vladimirovich VORONTSOV

07/12/1977

63954/14

10/11/2014

Vladislav Yevgenyevich RASCHUPKIN

27/04/1988

5771/15

24/12/2014

Aleksandr Nikolayevich SUSARIN

15/06/1972

7238/15

26/01/2015

Yevgeniy Vladimirovich BELYAYEV

21/09/1987