LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
Sorry, there was an error communicating with our API.
Try refreshing the page, and if the error persists, please try again in a few minutes.
KUZNETSOV v. RUSSIA and 35 other applications
Doc ref: 33389/07, 54480/07, 1570/08, 3975/08, 10309/08, 10594/08, 18069/08, 24980/08, 30066/08, 32015/08, 33... • ECHR ID: 001-140891
Document date: January 14, 2014
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 5
KUZNETSOV v. RUSSIA and 35 other applications
Doc ref: 33389/07, 54480/07, 1570/08, 3975/08, 10309/08, 10594/08, 18069/08, 24980/08, 30066/08, 32015/08, 33... • ECHR ID: 001-140891
Document date: January 14, 2014
Cited paragraphs only
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 33389/07 Ivan Vasilyevich KUZNETSOV against Russia and 35 other applications (see list appended)
The facts and complaints in these case s have been summarised in the Court ’ s decision , which is available in HUDOC.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charge against them, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? Specifically, were the applicants able to examine the witnesses against them as required by Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention?
2. Were there good reasons for the absence of the respective witnesses at trials (see Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, §§ 120-125 , ECHR 2011 )?
(a) If yes, what were these reasons and did the national authorities make reasonable effort to secure the presence of the witness es during trial as requested by the applicants?
(b) Were these reasons and efforts duly reviewed by the domestic courts?
(c) What were the grounds in the Russian law and practice on which the national courts relied in reading out of the pre-trial statements by the witnesses absent at trial?
3. Were the applicants ’ convictions based solely or to a decisive degree on the statements of the witnesses absent from trial (see Lucà v. Italy , no. 33354/96, § 40, ECHR 2001 ‑ II , and Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], cited above , §§ 126-128 , ECHR 2011 ) ?
4 . Having regard to the reading out of the absent witnesses ’ pre-trial statements, was the overall fairness of the proceedings ensured by the domestic courts as prescribed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention ( see Al ‑ Khawaja and Tahery v. United Kingdom , cited above, §§ 14 4-147 ) ? In addressing this issue the parties are invited to address each of the following questions:
(a) Did the competent national courts assess the impact of the absence of t he witnesses on the overall fairness of the proceedings?
(b) Did the national courts ensure the overall fairness of the proceedings as prescribed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention by relying on the good reasons for reading out of the witnesses ’ pre-trial statements and duly reflecting these reasons in the judgments ?
(c) Were there strong procedural safeguards put in place by the Russian law, practice, or specific arrangements in the applicants ’ cases, which would counterb alance the use of such evidence (see Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. United Kingdom , cited above, § 147) ?
(d) Having regard to the right “to examine or have examined witnesses against him” as enshrined in Article 6 § 3 (d), were the applicants able to examine the witnesses absent at trial during the pre-trial proceedings?
(i) Were they able to put questions to these witnesses and to submit their objections?
(ii) Were the applicants assisted by defence lawyers in examining the witnesses against them during the pre-trial proceedings?
(iii) Did the confrontation procedure conducted by the State officials, if any, meet the requirements of inde pendence and impartiality? (see Melnikov v. Russia , no. 23610/03, § 80, 14 January 2010)
5. Given the number of similar complaints originating from different Russian regions submitted to the Court over the period of many years and up until now, as well as repeated violations of Article 6 § 3 (d) in connection with Article 6 § 1 found by the Court in certain Russian cases, may it be considered that the present cases reveal an underlying problem that requires adoption of general measures in accordance with Article 46 § 1 of the Convention as interpreted in the light of Article 1 of the Convention?
6 . The Government are invited to provide where available:
(a) the copies of reports on pre-trial confrontations of the applicants with the witnesses absent from trial;
(b) the copies of police reports and other relevant documents on the attempts to secure presence of these witnesses during trial.
Appendix
No.
Application
no.
Lodged on
Applicant name
date of birth
Represented by
Final judgment
Witness(es) absent from trial
33389/07
04/07/2007
Ivan Vasilyevich KUZNETSOV
05/06/1983
Moscow City Court,
21 March 2007
victim Mr N.
54480/07
15/10/2007
Vladimir Gennadyevich NAGIBIN
07/07/1955
Yelena Pavlovna ARTAMONOVA
Moscow Regional Court,
17 April 2007
victim Mr R. and prosecution witness Mr Aks.
1570/08
09/12/2007
Mikhail Aleksandrovich FIRSTOV
03/07/1971
Dmitriy Vadimovich AREFYEV
24/04/1963
Moscow City Court,
13 June 2007
prosecution witness Mr K.
3975/08
12/12/2007
Dmitriy Grigoryevich ALEYNIKOV
27/11/1970
Moscow City Court,
13 June 2007
prosecution witness Mr K.
10309/08
22/01/2008
Sergey Anatolyevich KURBANOV
01/02/1982
Supreme Court of Khakasiya,
3 October 2007
victim Mr Ch.
10594/08
09/02/2008
Vladimir Yuryevich POSTOVALOV
08/12/1956
Rostov Regional Court,
18 September 2007
prosecution witness Mr F.
18069/08
27/01/2008
Maksim Romanovich ZLOBIN
10/09/1985
Chelyabinsk Regional Court,
27 July 2007
victim Mr N., prosecution witnesses Mr G. and Mr B.
24980/08
17/04/2008
Andrey Mikhaylovich PANCHENKO
09/09/1976
Supreme Court of Bashkortostan,
23 October 2007
prosecution witnesses Mr A., Mr Sh. and Mr Sl.
30066/08
29/05/2008
Sergey Lvovich SANAYEV
11/02/1978
Tula Regional Court,
20 February 2008
prosecution witnesses Mr G. and Mrs Kr.
32015/08
03/06/2008
Roman Yevgenyevich VLASOV
11/09/1979
Chelyabinsk Regional Court,
9 January 2008
prosecution witness Mr K.
33965/08
04/06/2008
Sergey Gennadyevich SAVENKOV
12/10/1981
Radik Rashitovich RAKHMATULLIN
Supreme Court of Bashkortostan,
6 December 2007
prosecution witness Mr T.
40306/08
09/06/2008
Lyubov Vasilyevna AKHTERYAKOVA
22/05/1981
Astrakhan Regional Court,
13 December 2007
prosecution witness Mrs Kaz .
46581/08
26/06/2008
Sergey Alekseyevich KOCHERGIN
01/06/1980
Supreme Court of Bashkortostan,
14 February 2008
prosecution witnesses Mr F. and Mr R.
47599/08
08/08/2008
Yuriy Valeryevich VYDRIN
05/03/1966
Krasnodar Regional Court,
27 February 2008
prosecution witnesses Mr S. and Mr Kos.
48895/08
15/09/2008
Sergey Vladimirovich SLOKHOV
25/06/1966
Tatyana Ivanovna PROTSENKO
Moscow City Court,
8 August 2008
prosecution witnesses Mrs V., Mr M., Mr K., Mr S., Mr Yud., Mr R., Mr Ul., Mr P., Mr Akh.
48905/08
15/09/2008
Gleb Aleksandrovich PAKULO
31/01/1968
Aleksey Mikhaylovich SURIN
Moscow City Court,
8 August 2008
prosecution witnesses Mrs V., Mr M., Mr K., Mr S., Mr Yud., Mr R., Mr Ul., Mr P., Mr Akh.
52304/08
25/09/2008
Aleksandr Eduardovich BLYUMIN
17/11/1964
Aleksandr Vyacheslavovich KOROLEV
Moscow Regional Court,
26 August 2008
victim Mrs Yer.
54353/08
18/08/2008
Valentina Mikhaylovna URUKOVA
06/06/1961
Supreme Court of Chuvashiya,
28 August 2008
prosecution witnesses Mr Il., Mr B., Mr Akh., Mr Z., Mr P., Mrs M.
7710/09
15/01/2009
Aleksey Aleksandrovich TKACHEV
05/10/1982
Astrakhan Regional Court,
14 August 2008
prosecution witnesses Mr B. and Mr Kh.
10781/09
05/11/2008
Igor Vladimirovich FEDYAYEV
29/07/1968
Aleksandr Petrovich POPOV
Kursk Regional Court,
3 July 2008
prosecution witness Mrs Sh.
11068/09
10/09/2008
Aleksey Nikolayevich KHVALNOV
10/03/1979
Tambov Regional Court,
18 March 2008
prosecution witness Mrs Sem.
12565/09
07/02/2009
Arkadiy Vladislavovich AKLANOV
25/03/1971
Novosibirsk Regional Court,
11 August 2008
prosecution witness Mr Zh.
14252/09
03/02/2009
Ivan Borisovich TELEGIN
27/02/1978
Larisa Nikolayevna YEREMICHEVA
Saint Petersburg City Court,
5 August 2008
victim Mr N.
35051/09
28/05/2009
Valeriy Nikolayevich KANAICHEV
05/04/1964
Moscow City Court,
18 March 2009
prosecution witnesses Mr R., Mr K., Mr F., Mr P., Mr Bozh, Mr Bryz.
35656/09
10/06/2009
Dmitriy Viktorovich DYAGILEV
08/12/1977
Aleksandr Vitalyevich VASILYEV
Moscow City Court,
13 July 2009
prosecution witnesses Mr Sh. and Mr Akh., victim Mr S.
36235/09
02/09/2009
Eduard Anatolyevich DYACHOK
23/10/1968
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court,
2 February 2010
prosecution witness Mr F.
46918/09
20/10/2009
Ivan Vladimirovich RYS
27/09/1984
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation,
5 May 2009
prosecution witness Mrs Sh.
6752/12
26/03/2012
Dinmukhamed Mustapayevich YSAKOV
27/09/1982
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation,
20 October 2011
prosecution witness Mr L.
66754/12
28/09/2012
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich NIKONOV
24/02/1979
Moscow City Court,
14 June 2012
prosecution witness Mr T.
68848/12
12/09/2012
Ruslan Rusamovich GALIYEV
13/02/1979
Supreme Court of Chuvashiya,
7 June 2012
victims Mrs S. and Mrs G.
892/13
12/12/2012
Vitaliy Vladimirovich DASHKOV
27/02/1976
Aleksey Vyacheslavovich SUSHKOV
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation,
27 June 2012
victim Mr T.
5987/13
17/01/2013
Yevgeniy Vladimirovich BELYAEV
04/10/1976
Sverdlovsk Regional Court,
3 August 2012
prosecution witness Mr M.
13105/13
18/02/2013
Zakhar Sergeyevich BERESTOVOY
10/08/1986
Lina Fedorovna MOTCHENKO
Moscow City Court,
20 August 2012
prosecution witnesses Mrs P., Mr M., Mr N., Mr S., Mrs Av.
13686/13
28/01/2013
Gennadiy Nikolayevich DOROSHCHENKO
07/03/1975
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court,
22 January 2013
victim Mr Er. and prosecution witness Mrs Ver.
14360/13
09/01/2013
Dmitriy Vladislavovich GLAZYRIN
03/10/1970
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation,
18 July 2012
victim Mrs M.
18635/13
25/12/2012
Boymukhamad Saidovich KODIROV
27/07/1967
Supreme Court of Chuvashiya,
28 June 2012
prosecution witness Mr B.
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
