Lexploria

FIFTH SECTION

CASE OF RADOSHEVICH AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 53209/17 and 22 others â€“

see appended list)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

22 February 2024

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

In the case of Radoshevich and Others v. Russia,

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

MarÃa ElÃ³segui , President , Mattias Guyomar, KateÅ™ina Å imÃ¡ÄkovÃ¡ , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 1 February 2024,

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 (â€œthe Conventionâ€) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2. The Russian Government (â€œthe Governmentâ€) 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 of the excessive length of their pre-trial detention. 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, Â§Â§ 68 â€‘ 73, 17 January 2023).

7. The applicants complained principally that their pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long. They relied on Article 5 Â§ 3 of the Convention.

8. The Court observes that the general principles regarding the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 Â§ 3 of the Convention, have been stated in a number of its previous judgments (see, among many other authorities, Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, 22 May 2012; KudÅ‚a v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, Â§ 110, ECHR 2000 â€‘ XI, and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, Â§Â§ 41 â€‘ 44, ECHR 2006 â€‘ X, with further references).

9. In the leading case of Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

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 length of the applicantsâ€™ pre-trial detention was excessive.

11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 5 Â§ 3 of the Convention.

12. Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 Â§ 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 findings in Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), related to the placement of applicants in a metal cage in courtrooms; Idalov , cited above, Â§Â§ 154-58, concerning the lack of speedy review of detention matters; Tomov and Others v. Russia , nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, 9 April 2019, concerning conditions of transport of detainees, and Korshunov v. Russia , no. 38971/06, Â§Â§ 59-63, 25 October 2007, as regards absence of an enforceable right to compensation for a violation of a right to trial within a reasonable time.

13. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case â€‘ law (see, in particular, Pastukhov and Yelagin v. Russia, no. 55299/07, 19 December 2013), 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 22 February 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 Â§Â§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Viktoriya Maradudina MarÃa ElÃ³segui

Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 Â§ 3 of the Convention

(excessive length of pre-trial detention)

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicantâ€™s name

Year of birth

Representativeâ€™s name and location

Period of detention

Court which issued detention order/examined appeal

Length of detention

Specific defects

Other complaints under well-established case-law

Amount awarded for pecuniary and non â€‘ pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant

(in euros) [1]

53209/17

11/07/2017

Aleksandr Ilyich RADOSHEVICH

1977

11/07/2016

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Leninskiy District Court and Voroshilovskiy District Court of Rostov-on-Don

6 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 6 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding

Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms â€“ placement of the applicant in a metal cage in the courtroom of the Leninskiy and Voroshilovskiy District Court, since 13/07/2016 -

ongoing possibly as of 16/09/2022

9,750

58512/18

28/11/2018

Igor Nikolayevich BELOUSOV

1963

Nazarov Ivan Nikolayevich

Rostov-on-Don

22/08/2017 to

22/05/2019

Tverskoy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court

1 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 1 day(s)

failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; fragility of the reasons employed by the courts

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - detention orders delivered on 04/05/2018, 16/08/2018, 19/11/2018 and 21/02/2019 were examined on appeal on 04/06/2018, 20/09/2018, 13/12/2018 and 16/04/2019, respectively

2,600

13179/21

11/02/2021

Mikhail Borisovich MIKHALEV

1982

21/01/2020 to

24/06/2021

Tsentralnyy District Court of Chita, Zabaykalskiy Regional Court, 8th Cassation Court

1 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 4 day(s)

failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; collective detention orders

1,600

17191/21

10/03/2021

Dmitriy Aleksandrovich GOLTSEV

1981

21/02/2018

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Leninskiy District Court of Stavropol, Nevinnomysskiy District Court of Stavropol, Stavropol Regional Court

4 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 27 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention; collective detention orders

4,700

19460/21

28/06/2021

Ivan Viktorovich VAYSBROT

1996

30/12/2019 to

28/12/2020

Sovetskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court

11 month(s) and 29 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts

use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re â€‘ offending, colluding or absconding; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint

Art. 5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate compensation, for the violation of Article 5 Â§ 3 of the Convention -

1,300

20633/21

31/03/2021

Garnik Robertovich SARKISYAN

1983

09/07/2015

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Babushkinskiy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court, First Appellate Court

7 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 8 day(s

collective detention orders; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint

5,000

22029/21

31/03/2021

Natalya Vasilyevna DONCHENKO

1979

Donchenko Dmitriy Anatolyevich

Krasnooktyabrskaya

21/01/2019 to

26/12/2019

20/05/2020 to

14/10/2021

Belorechenskiy District Court of Krasnodar Region, Krasnodar Regional Court

11 month(s) and 6 day(s)

1 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 25 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; collective detention orders; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint

2,500

22043/21

05/04/2021

Khadzhi-Murat Yuryevich MERDENOV

1965

Savin Vyacheslav Vasilyevich

Stavropol

13/08/2020 to

14/05/2021

Leninskiy District Court of Vladikavkaz, Supreme Court of Severnaya Osetiya-Alaniya Republic

9 month(s) and 2 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding

1,000

25553/21

06/05/2021

Nataliya Igorevna KOZHANOVA

1955

03/06/2020 to

28/07/2021

Nizhegorodsky District Court of Nizhny Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod Regional Court

1 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 26 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint

1,200

25614/21

23/04/2021

Andrey Sergeyevich LEVCHENKO

1982

Agranovskiy Dmitriy Vladimirovich

Moscow

28/09/2020

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Basmannyy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court

1 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 20 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint

Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms â€“ placement of the applicant in a metal cage in the court room of the Basmannyy District Court of Moscow, 29/09/2020-18/02/2021

9,750

30157/21

17/05/2021

Rinat Aleksandrovich FOREKS

1986

Kosolapov Andrey Yuryevich

[emailÂ protected]

10/06/2018 to

23/03/2020

13/11/2020

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Pravoberezhniy District Court of Magnitogorsk, Chelyabinsk Regional Court

1 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 14 day(s)

1 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 4 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice

Art. 5 (4) - deficiencies in proceedings for review of the lawfulness of detention - Pravoberezhnyy District Court of Magnitogorsk, 08/12/2020, appeal decision by the Chelyabinsk Regional Court, 14/01/2021;

Pravoberezhnyy District Court of Magnitogorsk, 10/02/2021, appeal decision by the Chelyabinsk Regional Court, on 03/03/2021

4,900

32318/21

05/06/2021

Marat Faritovich GANIYEV

1987

12/07/2019

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Vakhitovsky District Court of Kazan

3 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 5 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; collective detention orders; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding

Art. 5 (4) - deficiencies in proceedings for review of the lawfulness of detention -

1) detention order on 20/12/2020, Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic, appeal decision on 05/02/2021, Fourth Appellate Court;

2) detention order on 04/02/2021, Vakhitovskiy District Court of Kazan, appeal decision on 02/03/2021, Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic;

3) detention order on 01/04/2021, Vakhitovskiy District Court of Kazan, appeal decision on 23/04/2021, Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic;

4) detention order on 05/05/2021, Vakhitovskiy District Court of Kazan, appeal decision on 25/05/2021, Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic;

5) detention order on 01/07/2021, Vakhitovskiy District Court of Kazan, appeal decision on 30/07/2021, Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic;

6) detention order on 05/08/2021, Vakhitovskiy District Court of Kazan, appeal decision on 20/08/2021, Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic

4,300

32586/21

22/06/2021

Nikolay Yevgenyevich YUKHNOV

1981

Vodyanik Yekaterina Aleksandrovna

Rostov-on-Don

10/12/2020 to

09/06/2021

Azovskiy Town Court, Rostov Regional Court

6 month(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - Between 10/12/2020 and 09/06/2021, transport on several occasions by van, 0.65 m x 0.5 m and height 1.55 - 1.7 m; no windows; the applicantâ€™s weight is 110 kg and height 1.96 m

1,300

33069/21

31/05/2021

Zabaydullo Abdulakhadovich ZOKIROV

1981

24/04/2020

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Tsentralnyy District Court of Krasnoyarsk, Leninskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court

2 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 24 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding

2,500

35106/21

14/04/2021

Vsevolod Valeryevich KONDRATYEV

1974

Tyshchenko Nikolay Nikolayevich

Barnaul

24/07/2020

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Sovetskiy District Court of Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk Regional Court

2 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 24 day(s)

use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice

2,200

42144/21

04/08/2021

Oleg Leonidovich VLASOV

1972

Shukhardin Valeriy Vladimirovich

Moscow

06/05/2020

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Tverskoy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court

2 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 11 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; fragility and repetitiveness of the reasoning employed by the courts as the case progressed

2,500

50229/21

22/09/2021

Roman Eduardovich ARKHIPOV

1992

Belyayev Mikhail Aleksandrovich

Moscow

25/02/2021 to

12/11/2021

Zheleznodorozhnyy District Court of Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court

8 month(s) and 19 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint

1,000

51508/21

05/08/2021

Dmitriy Sergeyevich SENKIN

1979

07/07/2020

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Primorskiy District Court of St Petersburg, the St Petersburg City Court

2 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 10 day(s)

use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention

Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - Detention in a cage during detention proceedings since 09/07/2020 -

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court

9,750

56837/21

22/10/2021

Dmitriy Vladimirovich GLAZACHEV

1973

Zhuravlev Stanislav Igorevich

Moscow

12/04/2018

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow, Basmannyy Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court

4 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 5 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicantâ€™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

4,600

57991/21

29/11/2021

Sergey Vladimirovich TSUNIN

1957

17/08/2021

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Avtozavodsk District Court of Tolyatti, Samara Regional Court

1 year(s) and 1 month(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint

Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - Samara Regional Court; 02/11/2021

9,750

61186/21

23/11/2021

Mikhail Anatolyevich KORCHUGANOV

1986

13/03/2021 to

18/01/2022

Novo-Savinovskiy District Court of Kazan of the Republic of Tatrastan, Tsentralnyy District Court of Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court

10 month(s) and 6 day(s)

failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; failure to assess the applicantâ€™s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice

1,000

61737/21

29/11/2021

Natalya Semenovna ASANOVICH

1979

Lykov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Moscow

17/02/2021

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Tverskoy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court

1 year(s) and 7 month(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; collective detention orders; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention â€“ detention orders of the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow of 16/04/2021 and 15/07/2021, upheld on appeal by the Moscow City Court on 31/05/2021 and 25/08/2021, respectively.

2,200

3997/22

17/12/2021

Aleksandr Anatolyevich VARFOLOMEYEV

1986

04/06/2018

-

Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court, and possibly as of 16/09/2022

Leninskiy District Court of Kirov, Vakhitovskiy District Court of Kazan, Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan, Fourth Appeal Court

4 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 13 day(s)

fragility and repetitiveness of the reasoning employed by the courts as the case progressed; persistent reliance, as the case progressed, on charges concerning membership of an organised criminal group; failure to examine the possibility, as the case progressed, of applying other measures to secure attendance at the trial

4,400

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

Menu

CASE OF RADOSHEVICH AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

CASE OF RADOSHEVICH AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

LEXI