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.
CASE OF UGURYAN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 40018/16;57467/19;12187/21;30227/21;35368/21;61107/21;1497/22;2812/22;10091/22;14928/22 • ECHR ID: 001-230276
Document date: January 18, 2024
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 19
CASE OF UGURYAN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 40018/16;57467/19;12187/21;30227/21;35368/21;61107/21;1497/22;2812/22;10091/22;14928/22 • ECHR ID: 001-230276
Document date: January 18, 2024
Cited paragraphs only
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF UGURYAN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 40018/16 and 9 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
18 January 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Uguryan and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Péter Paczolay , President , Gilberto Felici, Raffaele Sabato , judges ,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 14 December 2023,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in ten applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Conventionâ€) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Russian Government (“the 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 that they had been unfairly convicted of drug offences following entrapment by State agents. 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 that they had been unfairly convicted of drug offences which they had been incited by State agents to commit and that their plea of entrapment had not been properly examined in the domestic proceedings. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
8. The Court reiterates that absence in the national legal system of a clear and foreseeable procedure for authorising test purchases of drugs remains a structural problem which exposes applicants to an arbitrary action by the State agents and prevents the domestic courts from conducting an effective judicial review of their entrapment pleas (see Veselov and Others v. Russia , nos. 23200/10 and 2 others, 2 October 2012 and Kuzmina and Others v. Russia , nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021).
9. The Court has consistently found a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on account of the deficient existing procedure for authorisation and administration of test purchases of drugs in the respondent State, an issue similar to that in the present case (see Veselov and Others , cited above, §§ 126 ‑ 28; Lagutin and Others v. Russia , nos. 6228/09 and 4 others, §§ 124 ‑ 25, 24 April 2014; Lebedev and Others v. Russia , nos. 2500/07 and 4 others, §§ 12 ‑ 16, 30 April 2015; and Yeremtsov and Others v. Russia , nos. 20696/06 and 4 others, §§ 17 ‑ 21, 27 November 2014).
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 as to 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 criminal proceedings against the applicants were incompatible with a notion of a fair trial.
11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
12. Some applicants submitted other complaints under the Convention. In view of the Court’s findings above, it considers that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints raised by the applicants.
13. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case law (see, in particular, Kumitskiy and Others v. Russia , nos. 66215/12 and 4 others, § 17, 10 July 2018), the Court considers that the finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction in the present case.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
Done in English, and notified in writing on 18 January 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Péter Paczolay Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(unfair conviction for an offence committed as a result of entrapment by State agents)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Date of test purchase/
"operational experiment"
Type of offence
Specific grievances
Final domestic judgment (appeal/cassation court, date)
Case-law
40018/16
29/06/2016
Margar Norikovich UGURYAN
1977
25/11/2014
marijuana
lack of incriminating information
Rostov Regional Court, 10/05/2016
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia , nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021, drug-related crime:
Yeremtsov and Others v. Russia , nos. 20696/06, 22504/06, 41167/06, 6193/07 and 18589/07, 27 November 2014
57467/19
31/10/2019
Aminat Magomedovna ABDURAKHMANOVA
1973
11/09/2018
bribe-related offence
pressure to proceed with illegal activity
Astrakhan Regional Court, 30/05/2019
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021
12187/21
25/02/2021
Yunyuye SHEN
1957
Kulapov Vitaliy Viktorovich
Moscow
31/12/2017
bribe-related offence
pressure to proceed with illegal activity
Supreme Court of Russia, 29/08/2022
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021
Ivanov and Others v. Russia, nos.62082/10 and 6 others, 19 July 2022.
30227/21
21/10/2021
Sergey Valeryevich BOKOV
1975
04/03/2016
ephedrine
repeated calls, the applicant was not known to the police as a drug dealer before the information given by the drug user, who then acted as a buyer, lack of incriminating information, no evidence that the applicant profited in any respect from the drug sale
Supreme Court of Russia, 27/12/2021
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021
Yeremtsov and Others v. Russia , nos. 20696/06, 22504/06, 41167/06, 6193/07 and 18589/07, 27 November 2014
35368/21
24/06/2021
Maksim Yuryevich NOROK
1979
Boyarko Vladimir Nikolayevich
Krasnodar
07/07/2017
marijuana
repeated calls, fellow drug user, pressure to sell
Supreme Court of Russia, 25/03/2021
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021, drug-related crime:
Yeremtsov and Others v. Russia, nos. 20696/06, 22504/06, 41167/06, 6193/07 and 18589/07, 27 November 2014
61107/21
09/12/2021
Vadim Albertovich DENIYEV
1959
Golubenko Andrey Yevgenyevich
Nea Skiony
22/11/2018
bribe-related crime
lack of incriminating information
Supreme Court of Russia, 10/08/2021
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021,
Ivanov and Others v. Russia , nos. 62082/10 and 6 others, 19 July 2022
1497/22
02/12/2021
Maksim Skayper Ogly ALIGULIYEV
1980
16/11/2017
N-metilefedron
fellow drug user, lack of incriminating information, pressure to sell, repeated calls
Supreme Court of Russia, 02/07/2021
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021,
Yeremtsov and Others v. Russia, nos. 20696/06, 22504/06, 41167/06, 6193/07 and 18589/07, 27 November 2014
2812/22
24/11/2021
Andrey Igorevich DEMIN
1981
Korchagin Arseniy Sergeyevich
Yaroslavl
06/12/2018
heroin
fellow drug user, lack of incriminating information, pressure to sell
Supreme Court of Russia, 26/05/2021
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021,
Yeremtsov and Others v. Russia, nos. 20696/06, 22504/06, 41167/06, 6193/07 and 18589/07, 27 November 2014
10091/22
10/02/2022
Maksim Aleksandrovich KONSTANTINOV
1983
05/02/2019
N-methylephedrine
fellow drug user, anonymous/unverified tip
Supreme Court of Russia,
22/09/2021
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021,
Yeremtsov and Others v. Russia, nos. 20696/06, 22504/06, 41167/06, 6193/07 and 18589/07, 27 November 2014
14928/22
15/02/2022
Ruslan Abdulkhakimovich AMANZATOV
1983
05/05/2019
heroin
anonymous/unverified tip, lack of incriminating information
Supreme Court of Russia, 14/09/2021
Kuzmina and Others v. Russia, nos. 66152/14 and 8 others, 20 April 2021,
Yeremtsov and Others v. Russia , nos. 20696/06, 22504/06, 41167/06, 6193/07 and 18589/07, 27 November 2014
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
