Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

CASE OF KLYACHKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 38521/16, 20728/17, 47409/17, 70513/17, 74882/17, 36597/18, 38005/18, 38870/18, 38872/18, 39937/18, ... • ECHR ID: 001-228536

Document date: November 2, 2023

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 12

CASE OF KLYACHKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 38521/16, 20728/17, 47409/17, 70513/17, 74882/17, 36597/18, 38005/18, 38870/18, 38872/18, 39937/18, ... • ECHR ID: 001-228536

Document date: November 2, 2023

Cited paragraphs only

SECOND SECTION

CASE OF KLYACHKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 38521/16 and 41 others –

see appended list)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

2 November 2023

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Klyachkov and Others v. Russia,

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

Lorraine Schembri Orland , President , Frédéric Krenc, Davor Derenčinović , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 12 October 2023,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.

THE FACTS

3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

4. The applicants complained about their confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom during the criminal proceedings against them. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

6. The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68 ‑ 73, 17 January 2023).

7. The applicants complained principally about their confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom during the criminal proceedings against them. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

8. Some applicants also complained that they had not been afforded an effective domestic remedy in respect of their grievances under Article 3, contrary to Article 13 of the Convention, reading as follows:

“Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in [the] Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.”

9. The Court notes that the applicants were kept in a metal cage in the courtroom in the context of their trial. In the leading cases of Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts) and Vorontsov and Others v. Russia, nos. 59655/14 and 2 others, 31 January 2017, the Court already dealt with the issue of the use of metal cages in courtrooms and found that such a practice constituted in itself an affront to human dignity and amounted to degrading treatment prohibited by Article 3 of the Convention.

10. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ confinement in a metal cage before the court during the criminal proceedings against them amounted to degrading treatment.

11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

12. In view of the above findings under Article 3 of the Convention, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with the applicants’ complaints under Article 13 of the Convention (for similar approach see Valyuzhenich v. Russia , no. 10597/13, § 27, 26 March 2019).

13. Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see the appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill ‑ founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its well-established case-law (see Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, §§ 103 ‑ 108 and 154-58, 22 May 2012, concerning conditions of transport of detainees and the lack of a speedy review of detention matters; Dirdizov v. Russia , no. 41461/10, §§ 108-11, 27 November 2012, as regards the excessive length of pre-trial detention; Tomov and Others v. Russia , nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 92-156, 9 April 2019, concerning the lack of an effective remedy for the complaint about inadequate conditions during transport; Andrey Smirnov v. Russia, no. 43149/10, 13 February 2018, concerning restrictions in connection with family visits for prisoners detained on remand; and Butkevich v. Russia , no. 5865/07, § 67, 13 February 2018, concerning a delayed release of a prisoner).

14. Article 41 of the Convention provides:

“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”

15. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Vorontsov and Others, cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 2 November 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Viktoriya Maradudina Lorraine Schembri Orland Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention

(use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms)

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Name of the court

Date of the relevant judgment

Other complaints under well-established case-law

Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]

38521/16

17/06/2016

Dmitriy Nikolayevich KLYACHKOV

1981Basmannyy District Court of Moscow, Primorskiy District Court of St Petersburg

03/04/2016

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - 03/04/2015 – 03/04/2016 – transport in a single-prisoner cubicle; 0.49 sq. m. of personal space, no ventilation, no windows, inadequate temperature, transported on multiple occasions, duration of 2 ‑ 4 hours on each occasion (Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 et al.,

9 April 2019, §§ 137-40);

Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - pre-trial detention of a former investigator on charges of abuse of powers and falsification of evidence from 06/04/2015 to 02/04/2016, last appeal against the extension order – St Petersburg City Court, 04/03/2016; failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re ‑ offending, colluding or absconding; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention; fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - appeal against the decision extending the applicant’s pre-trial detention on 02/10/2015 (Basmannyy District Court of Moscow) was examined on 15/03/2016 (Moscow City Court).

Appeal against the decision extending the applicant’s pre-trial detention on 30/12/2015 (Primorskiy District Court of St Petersburg) was examined on 04/03/2016 (St Petersburg City Court);

Art. 8 (1) - restrictions on family visits in pre-trial facilities - limitation on visits in remand prison: the applicant complained that, within the period of his detention in the SIZO-1 of Moscow and SIZO-1 St Petersburg (03/04/2015 – 03/04/2016) he was allowed visits with his wife only twice

9,750

20728/17

27/02/2017

Viktor Vladimirovich SOSNIN

1975Cherepovets Town Court

20/02/2017

7,500

47409/17

25/06/2017

Zhelavdi Nasrudinovich GERIYEV

1993Yermolayeva Nadezhda Viktorovna

Moscow

Shalinskiy Town Court of the Chechen Republic, Supreme Court of the Chechen Republic

28/12/2016

7,500

70513/17

28/04/2017

Sergey Anatolyevich KNYAZEV

1970Krasnoyarsk Regional Court

02/11/2017

7,500

74882/17

26/08/2017

Aleksandr Valeriyevich BOKHONOV

1975Noginsk Town Court of the Moscow Region

Video-link from SIZO,

Shchyolkovo Town Court of the Moscow Region

29/03/2018;

Video-link from SIZO

05/09/2018

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - 05/09/2018 - 06/09/2018, delay of almost 30 hours in releasing the applicant (see Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, § 67, 13 February 2018)

9,750

36597/18

20/07/2018

Andrey Alekseyevich TETERIN

1979Pekteyeva Nataliya Alekseyevna

Moscow

Moskovskiy District Court of Cheboksary, Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic

17/04/2018

7,500

38005/18

28/07/2018

Lechi Khamzatovich BOLATBAYEV

1975Magomedova Roza Saidovna

Moscow

Zamoskvoretskiy District Court of Moscow

06/11/2018

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - the applicant’s appeals against the detention orders of the Moscow City Court of 16/01/2018 and of the Zamoskvoretskiy District Court of Moscow of 19/04/2018 were examined on 06/03/2018 and 30/05/2018, respectively

8,000

38870/18

02/08/2018

Konstantin Grigoryevich SUPRYADKIN

1980Ezhvinskiy District Court of Syktyvkar

13/07/2018

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - by train on 27/08/2018 and 28/08/2018; insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to potable water, passive smoking

9,750

38872/18

01/08/2018

Aleksandr Yuryevich GRIGORYEV

1971Smirnova Anna Vladimirovna

Moscow

Rostov Regional Court

15/08/2019

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - appeal against the detention order of the Leninskiy District Court of Rostov ‑ on-Don of 04/06/2018 was examined by the Rostov Regional Court on 05/07/2018 (appeal lodged on 07/06/2018)

8,000

39937/18

10/08/2018

Aleksandr Olegovich EBINGARD

1988Andreyev Ashot Aleksandrovich

Syktyvkar

Syktyvkar Town Court

12/02/2018

7,500

39953/18

15/08/2018

Aleksey Feodosyevich OSOKIN

1970Ryumin Yevgeniy Guryevich

Vologda

Vologda Town Court

17/07/2018

7,500

40611/18

15/08/2018

Pavel Aleksandrovich FOMICHEV

1985Sokolskiy District Court of Vologda Region

29/03/2018

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law and in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - on numerous occasions between 20/02/2017 and 29/03/2018 the applicant was transported between the remand prison and the courthouse in a single compartment measuring 0,3 sq. m. The trips lasted each time one hour. At the courthouse he was placed in a cell measuring 4 sq. m with two other inmates. There was no ventilation, windows or lighting.

8,500

41569/18

13/08/2018

Maksim Gennadyevich RYLCHSHIKOV

1987Justice of the Peace of the Morozovskiy Judicial Circuit of Syktyvkar

23/05/2018

7,500

41691/18

16/08/2018

Vitaliy Vladimirovich VESELKOV

1977Ikhsanov Albert Flyurovich

Izhevsk

Agryz District Court, Tatarstan Republic

26/10/2018

7,500

41766/18

15/08/2018

Yevgeniy Valeryevich BAZHUKOV

1984Ezhvinskiy District Court of Syktyvkar

27/11/2019

7,500

42017/18

22/08/2018

Aleksandr Viktorovich ZOLOTAREV

1979Shirokov Oleg Valeryevich

Nizhniy Tagil

Ordzhonikidzevskiy District Court of Yekaterinburg

21/03/2018

7,500

45962/18

10/09/2018

Semen Romanovich GRYAZEV

1997Lefortovo District Court of Moscow

08/05/2018

7,500

47301/18

01/07/2019

Sergey Anatolyevich SKOBELIN

1985Zabaykalskiy Region Court

11/01/2019

7,500

48919/18

01/10/2018

Igor Nikolayevich SEROV

1976Bor Town Court

23/08/2018

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - from 26/05/2017 to 27/08/2018: van; 0.3 sq. m of personal space; lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, no or restricted access to toilet, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light

8,500

48934/18

01/10/2018

Pavel Yuryevich STEPANENKO

1976Traktorozavodskiy District Court of Volgograd

22/08/2018

7,500

50630/18

18/10/2018

Maksim Yevgenyevich YEGOROV

1996Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Moskovskiy District Court of Kaliningrad

07/08/2018

7,500

50639/18

18/10/2018

Igor Olegovich ZAGUMENNYY

1989Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Leningradskiy District Court of Kaliningrad

31/07/2018

7,500

51223/18

20/10/2018

Vadim Vladimirovich KASHKIN

1969Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Tsentralnyy District Court of Tyumen

05/06/2018

7,500

51644/18

16/10/2018

Rinat Ildusovich MAMETOV

1989Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Uvatskiy District Court of the Tyumen Region

24/07/2018

7,500

55027/18

24/10/2018

Nikitia Vladimirovich DEMKOV

1999Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Leninskiy District Court of Kaliningrad

05/07/2018

7,500

55422/18

08/11/2018

Aleksandr Vladimirovich BELTYUKOV

1988Justice of the Peace for judicial circuit no. 5 of the Leninskiy judicial district of Tyumen

15/05/2018

7,500

55598/18

13/11/2018

Vyacheslav Robertovich SHATROVSKIY

1969Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich

Velikiy Novgorod

Tverskoy District Court of Moscow

24/05/2018

Moscow City Court, video link from IK-5 Kirov Region

20/09/2018

7,500

55653/18

16/11/2018

Pavel Andreyevich TERENIN

1988Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

Dzerzhinskiy District Court of St Petersburg

15/10/2018

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - numerous transfers between the remand prison and the courthouse in an overcrowded van (10 to 12 inmates per compartment); transfers lasted from 1 to 1.5 hours; since 23/05/2018;

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law and in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport

8,500

55690/18

10/11/2018

Yevgeniy Yuryevich BAUROV

1991Andreyev Ashot Aleksandrovich

Syktyvkar

Syktyvkar Town Court

11/05/2018

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law and in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - by van on numerous occasions between the detention facility and the courthouse in the period between 06/06/2017 and 11/05/2018; overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of fresh air

8,500

55731/18

12/11/2018

Aleksandr Aleksandrovich BERCHENKO

1988Urlashov Aleksey Mikhaylovich

St Petersburg

Vyborgskiy City Court of the Leningrad Region

14/12/2018

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - multiple transfers by van from the detention facilities to a courthouse from 30/03/2017 to 08/04/2019; overcrowding (15 inmates were placed in a compartment measuring 3 sq. m); transfers lasted 3 hours;

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport

8,500

55741/18

03/11/2018

Sergey Aleksandrovich GAVRILYUK

1985Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Moskovskiy District Court of Kaliningrad

24/05/2018

7,500

55758/18

03/11/2018

Vyacheslav Aleksandrovich KOSTYANYUK

1992Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Surgut Town Court

17/07/2018

7,500

55760/18

08/10/2018

Aleksandr Valentinovich SAKSIN

1963Leninskiy District Court, Sovetskiy District Court, Tsentralnyy District Court and Kirovskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk

08/06/2018

7,500

56256/18

03/11/2018

Sergey Nikolayevich OVCHINNIKOV

1959Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Kalininskiy District Court of Tyumen

04/06/2018

7,500

57269/18

21/11/2018

Grigoriy Aleksandrovich PROKOFYEV

1968Oktyabrskiy District Court of Irkutsk

17/06/2019

7,500

57308/18

29/10/2018

Maksim Vadimovich LUKIN

1994Surgut Town Court

09/06/2018

7,500

57820/18

19/11/2018

Kirill Viktorovich GOLOVASHKIN

1991Alekseyenko Dmitriy Andreyevich

Nizhniy Novgorod

Sormovskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod

03/08/2018

7,500

57831/18

19/11/2018

Andrey Ildarovich GILVANOV

1990Sormovskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod

03/08/2018

7,500

58064/18

26/11/2018

Tural Orudzh Ogly YUSIFLI

1993Leninskiy District Court of Tyumen

09/08/2018

7,500

58274/18

28/11/2018

Vasiliy Valerianovich KISKI

1983Leninskiy District Court of Ulyanovsk

01/10/2018

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law and in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transport by van and train from 03/02/2017 to 07/10/2018; was placed in single compartment: transfers lasted from 1.5 to 2 hours; lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient electric light, no or restricted access to toilet, inadequate temperature

8,500

58528/18

05/12/2018

Yegor Vladimirovich NOSKOV

1981Medvedeva Anna Olegovna

Moscow

Basmannyy District Court and Savelovskiy District Court of Moscow

14/11/2019

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transport in van from 24/01/2018 to 01/04/2019: passive smoking, overcrowding, lack of or insufficient electric light, inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, accommodation with inmates under stricter regime, transfers (both ways) lasted 8 hours;

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport

8,500

58551/18

26/11/2018

Yevgeniy Petrovich VASILYEV

1977Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich

Tyumen

Tsentralnyy District Court of Tyumen

31/08/2018

7,500

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 398107 • Paragraphs parsed: 43931842 • Citations processed 3409255