Published on 26 June 2023

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 6519/21 Tatyana Georgiyevna MARTYNOVA against Russia and 8 other applications

(see list appended)

PROCEDURAL INFORMATION

Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 1 June 2023, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the applications should be given to the Government of Russia.

In the applications marked by an asterisk, other complaints were raised. This part of the applications has been struck out of the Court’s list of cases or declared inadmissible by the Court, sitting in a single-judge formation, assisted by a rapporteur as provided for in Article 24 § 2 of the Convention.

In the enclosed list of applications, whenever an applicant is referred to using initials, this indicates that the Court has authorised anonymity for that person, whose identity will not be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4).

For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website .

SUBJECT MATTER

The applications concern complaints raised under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention relating to unlawful search which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Misan v. Russia, no. 4261/04, 2 October 2014 and Kruglov and Others v. Russia, nos. 11264/04 and 15 others, 4 February 2020).

APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS

List of applications raising complaints under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention (unlawful search)

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Type of search

Premises

Date of the search authorisation

Name of issuing authority

Date of the search

Means of exhaustion

Specific defects

Other relevant information

Other complaints under well-established case-law

6519/21

28/12/2020

Tatyana Georgiyevna MARTYNOVA

1963Valeriy Valeryevich Volokh

Moscow

Search of the flat

16/07/2020, investigator, 17/06/2020 Khamovnicheskiy District Court of Moscow

16/07/2020

Moscow City Court, 21/09/2020

no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion), no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: applicant not a suspect

25412/21*

16/04/2021

Ilya Vasilyevich ARISHCHENKOV

1988Aleksandr Vasilyevich Artamonov

Moscow

Search of the flat

02/09/2020, investigator, 04/09/2020, Chertanovskiy District Court

02/09/2020

Moscow City Court rejected the applicant’s appeal on 01/12/2020

no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion)

The applicant is an entrepreneur, who provides legal services (no evidence of being a Bar member). The investigation concerns Art. 159 § 4 of the Criminal Code (aggravated fraud). The Chertanovskiy District Court declared the lawfulness of the search ex post facto.

32407/21

05/06/2021

Roman Konstantinovich KAMENEV

1979Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Brester

Krasnoyarsk

Search under the OSAA, the applicant’s flat

09/12/2020, the Sovetskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk

date of the search -10/12/2020. The applicant filed a cassation appeal against the judgment of 09/12/2020 seeking the full review of the decision to issue a search warrant. On 17/02/2021 the 8th Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction upheld the decision of 09/12/2020.

no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion), no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: no evidence supporting the search authorisation

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law - a judicial decision authorising operational-search measures under the OSAA was not amenable to a review by a higher court and no other remedies in respect of this decision were available (see Avanesyan v. Russia,

no. 41152/06, §§ 30-36, 18 September 2014)

32550/21*

27/05/2021

Ilya Valeryevich KUPTSOV

1989Roman Mikhaylovich Kashirin

Pskov

Search of the flat

24/02/2021, Investigator of the Novgorod Region Department of the Federal Security Service, 02/03/2021 Novgorodskiy District Court of the Novgorod Region

25/02/2021

domestic courts declared ex post facto the lawfulness of the search. Novgorod Regional Court, 15/04/2021

no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: lawyer not allowed to assist the applicant during the search, no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion)

50368/21*

22/09/2021

Giya Enverovich KAKABADZE

1960Dmitriy Vladimirovich Zubarev

Vladivostok

Search of the flat

court search warrant of 05/02/2021 issued by the Pervorechenskiy District Court of Vladivostok

06/02/2021

the Primorye Regional Court, 23/03/2021

no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion), no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: applicant not a suspect

50369/21*

22/09/2021

Maksim Aleksandrovich KHOZYAYKIN

1986Kseniya Nikolayevna KHOZYAYKINA

1985Kira Maksimovna KHOZYAYKINA

2009Dmitriy Vladimirovich Zubarev

Vladivostok

Search of the flat

05/02/2021 Pervorechenskiy District Court of Vladivostok

06/02/2021

Primorye Regional Court, 23/03/2021

no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: no evidence supporting the search authorisation, no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion)

The applicants are a human rights defender and his wife and daughter. Their flat was searched within criminal proceedings against participants of Otpuskay manifestations.

55440/21

26/10/2021

Yuliya Valeryevna KULIKOVA

1977Denis Yevgenyevich Kozyrev

Lipovitsy

Search, of the offices rented by the applicant, under the Code of Criminal Procedure

14/04/2021, Investigator of the Volokolamsk Town Circuit, 26/04/2021 Volokolamsk Town Court of the Moscow Region

14/04/2021

the applicant complained to the domestic courts under article 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Final - Moscow Regional Court, 24/06/2021

no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion), no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: applicant not a suspect, no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: no reasons given why any relevant objects or documents might be found during the search

57275/21*

17/11/2021

Yevgeniya Eduardovna LITVINOVA

1960Vitaliy Viktorovich Cherkasov

St Petersburg

Search of the flat

31/01/2021, investigator

31/01/2021 Kuybyshevskiy District Court of St Petersburg, 02/02/2021

St Petersburg City Court, 28/05/2021

no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: applicant not a suspect, no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: no reasons given why any relevant objects or documents might be found during the search, no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion)

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law - in conjunction with Article 8 related to the search

58638/21

10/11/2021

Yelena Anatolyevna GRECHINA

1975Denis Anatolyevich Matyukhin

Taganrog

Search of the applicant’s flat

21/07/2021 Taganrog Town Court

06/08/2021

the decision of 21/07/2021 was not amenable to appeal

no relevant or sufficient reasons to justify the search: no evidence supporting the search authorisation, no adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse: broad terms/wide content and scope of the search warrant (objects and documents not specific enough to restrict police’s discretion)

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law - in respect of search authorisation.