Communicated on 9 February 2010

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 19356/07 Lia SHIOSHVILI against Russia lodged on 4 May 2007

STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. The background to the case

1 . During the period from the end of September 2006 to the end of January 2007 identity checks of Georgian nationals residing in Russia were carried out in the streets, markets and other workplaces and at their homes. Many were subsequently arrested and taken to police stations. After a period of custody in police stations, they were grouped together and taken by bus to a court, which summarily imposed administrative penalties on them and gave decisions ordering their administrative expulsion from Russian territory. Subsequently, after sometimes undergoing a medical visit and a blood test, they were taken to detention centres for foreigners where they were detained for varying periods of time, and then taken by bus to various airports in Moscow, and expelled to Georgia by aeroplane. Some of the Georgian nationals against whom expulsion orders were issued left the territory of the Russian Federation by their own means (for further details as to the background of the case see Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, § 45, ECHR 2014).

B. The circumstances of the present case

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

3 . The first applicant, Ms Lia Shioshvili , is a Georgian national who was born on 14 January 1977 and lives in Gurjaani (Georgia). She is the mother of the second, third, fourth and fifth applicants, born respectively in 1995, 1997, 2000 and 2004. They are represented before the Court by Mr N. Legashvili , a lawyer practising in Tbilisi.

4 . On 29 May 1998 the first applicant, her husband and her two children arrived in the Russian Federation in order to improve their poor financial situation – there was no visa requirement for Georgian citizens at the time. Subsequently, the first applicant, her husband and the children had been back and forth several times between the Russian Federation and Georgia.

5 . On 21 April 2003 the first applicant and her children again entered the territory of the Russian Federation with a visa valid for one month. They settled together with their husband/father in the village of Karinskoye , in the Odintsovski district of Moscow city.

6 . At the beginning of October 2006, the applicants moved to the city of Ruza in order to avoid expulsion.

1. The applicants ’ forced stay in Derbent (Dagestan)

7 . On 18 October 2006 a police officer came to the applicants ’ family home in Ruza and requested the first applicant to produce her identity papers. He then asked all the applicants to follow him to the militia station.

8 . A hearing before the Ruza Court took place on 7 November 2006 following which an expulsion decision was issued on the same day. The hearing lasted about ten minutes and despite her poor knowledge of the Russian language, the first applicant was not assisted by an interpreter.

9 . On 20 November 2006, after having received the expulsion decision of 7 November 2006 all five applicants left Moscow. Due to suspended air, rail, road, sea and postal communications between the Russian Federation and Georgia, the applicants took the train from Moscow to Baku ( Azerbaïdjan ). The first applicant was eight months pregnant at the material time and her four minor children were eleven, nine, six and two years old.

10 . On 22 November 2006 at 10.30 pm near the Russian/ Azerbaïdjani border, Russian migration officers stopped the train and asked all Georgian nationals to get off the train with their belongings. They collected their identity and travel documents and confiscated 400 USD from the first applicant, which allegedly had not been declared. The officers informed all the Georgians including the applicants, that there were various irregularities in their documents and that they could not continue their journey, whereas all non ‑ Georgians could resume their journey on the train.

11 . The five applicants were then requested to walk with the other Georgian nationals to Derbent city. Two migration officers escorted the group but would not inform them of the authorities ’ intention nor where the group was being taken. It was late at night and very cold and the first applicant experienced difficulties due to her advanced pregnancy. She had to carry a suitcase and her youngest child. She complained to the officers, but to no avail.

12 . Once the group arrived in Derbent city, the migration officers asked the group to accompany them to the migration service office. The first applicant could not continue walking and waited outside for two hours with her children. She was worried for the health of her minor children and for the unborn child.

13 . On 23 November 2006, at about 3 am, the group was taken to Derbent train station for the night. They had to pay 500 rubles to the migration officers to be allowed to go to the toilet. No water or food was provided.

14 . At daybreak, the migration officers asked the group to go to the migration service office again, where they spent the whole day outside at a temperature of 5 o C.

15 . In the evening the first applicant ’ s health deteriorated, her children were crying and coughing and no shelter, water or food was offered. Finally, they rented an unheated, four-room basement flat in Derbent city, for which the first applicant had to pay 200 rubles per day for her and the children. Three women and six children from the group of Georgians, including the applicants, settled in one room, which had four beds. The remaining three rooms were occupied by more than 20 Georgian men.

16 . The migration officers regularly visited the flat, but the first applicant ’ s complaints about her worsening health were to no avail.

17 . On 29 November 2006, being confronted with, and worried about the idea of giving birth to the child in these difficult conditions, the first applicant tried to cross the Russian/ Azerbaïdjani border with her three eldest children. However, they were stopped by the customs officers who indicated that the court ’ s expulsion decision only concerned the first applicant and not her children. They were all sent back to Derbent city.

18 . The first applicant ’ s health worsened, she suffered from a cold and had fever, became depressed and had repeated asthma attacks.

19 . On 3 and 4 December 2006, after having gone back and forth to the migration service office, and with the help of an employee from the consulate service of the Georgian Embassy in Moscow, the first applicant finally obtained a copy of the court ’ s expulsion decision - which had been taken by one of the migration officers - so that she could leave for Georgia with her children.

20 . Several national broadcasting television companies reported on the Georgians ’ situation in Derbent city on a daily basis between 1 and 7 December 2006.

2. The applicants ’ return to Georgia

21 . On 5 December 2006 a group of 30 Georgians, including the applicants, travelled to the Russian/ Azerbaïdjani border in two buses that they had hired. The applicants were travelling in the first bus and had to wait for three hours outside for the second bus. The customs officers checked the documents for several hours, and the first applicant was not allowed a chair despite her condition. They confiscated her court expulsion decision.

22 . Finally the group rented another bus which took them through the city of Baku to the Azerbaïdjani /Georgian border. They had to walk for 30 minutes, as the bus driver had asked them to get off the bus: the first applicant and her youngest child could take a taxi but the three other children had to continue walking; the temperature was below 3 o C.

23 . After having arrived in Georgia, the first applicant ’ s health was particularly bad. She suffered from a severe cough and fever, her right leg had grown numb and her general condition was extremely weak.

24 . On 12 December 2006, the first applicant ’ s health worsened, she had an asthma attack and severe abdominal pain.

25 . On 14 December 2006, the first applicant was taken to hospital where she gave birth to a stillborn child the next day.

26 . According to the death certificate issued by the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs on 15 December 2006, the child died as a result of “ intranatal hipoqsy ” caused by a viral infection. The birth history n o 364/12, issued on the same date, stated that “the stress experienced by the pregnant mother during the expulsion could be considered a reason for the child ’ s death”.

27 . During the following months, the first applicant suffered from severe depression and panic attacks. Furthermore, the fourth applicant developed a very bad cough and caught pneumonia. The fifth applicant, the first applicant ’ s youngest child, was deeply affected psychologically by the expulsion: she was constantly crying and afraid of other people and diagnosed with “behavioral disorder”.

3. The first applicant ’ s complaint to the Prosecutor

28 . On 23 July 2008, the first applicant lodged a complaint with the General Prosecutor ’ s office of the Russian Federation. She directly mentioned violations of Articles 3 and 14 of the Convention and requested a thorough investigation and the punishment of those responsible.

29 . On 9 October 2008, the first applicant ’ s representative received an answer, informing him that the complaint had been forwarded to the Prosecutor of Derbent city and that he would be notified about further procedural actions taken in this respect.

30 . However, he received no further information from the Russian authorities.

COMPLAINTS

31 . The applicants complain under Article 3 of the Convention that the Russian authorities subjected them to inhuman and degrading treatment by unlawfully forcing them to terminate their travel to Georgia and to spend two weeks in the border city of Derbent , without any health care arrangements, accommodation, food, transport and logistical support. As a result of this ill-treatment, the first applicant gave birth to a stillborn child, suffered severe emotional depression, and her minor children suffered health consequences of various degrees.

32 . They also considered that the lack of an effective remedy amounted to a violation of Article 13 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 3.

33 . Under Article 2 of Protocol n o 4, the applicants complained that their right of freedom of movement, in particular their right to leave Russia, was unlawfully restricted by the Russian immigration authorities in Derbent .

34 . They furthermore alleged that there were victims of a collective expulsion like thousands of other Georgians in the autumn of 2006 and which amounted to a violation of Article 4 of Protocol n o 4.

35 . The applicants also alleged that their expulsion and ill-treatment were discriminatory on the ground of their ethnic origin as Georgians and amounted to a violation of Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention and with Articles 2 and 4 of Protocol n o 4.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the conditions of expulsion of the five applicants from the Russian Federation, in particular during their two weeks ’ forced stay in Derbent (Dagestan) from 22 November until 5 December 2006? Has there been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 3?

2. Has there been a violation of the applicants ’ right to liberty of movement and in particular of their freedom to leave the territory of the Russian Federation, contrary to Article 2 of Protocol No. 4?

3. Were the applicants expelled as part of a collective measure, in breach of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4?

4. Have the applicants suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights on the ground of their ethnic or national origin, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention, and with Articles 2 and 4 of Protocol n o 4?