SHVETS AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE - 50415/21 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fifth Section Committee) [2023] ECHR 617 (20 July 2023)


BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

European Court of Human Rights


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> SHVETS AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE - 50415/21 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fifth Section Committee) [2023] ECHR 617 (20 July 2023)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2023/617.html
Cite as: [2023] ECHR 617

[New search] [Contents list] [Help]


 

 

FIFTH SECTION

CASE OF SHVETS AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE

(Applications nos. 50415/21 and 8 others -

see appended list)

 

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

STRASBOURG

20 July 2023

 

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


In the case of Shvets and Others v. Ukraine,

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

 Carlo Ranzoni, President,
 Lado Chanturia,
 María Elósegui, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 29 June 2023,

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

PROCEDURE


1.  The case originated in applications against Ukraine 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 Ukrainian 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 of the inadequate conditions of their detention and of the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.

THE LAW

  1. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS


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

  1. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 3 AND 13 OF THE CONVENTION


6.  The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention and that they had no effective remedy in this connection. They relied on Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.


7.  The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants' detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 96-101, ECHR 2016). It reiterates in particular that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are "degrading" from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 122-41, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149-59, 10 January 2012).


8.  In the leading cases of Melnik v. Ukraine, no. 72286/01, 28 March 2006 and Sukachov v. Ukraine, no. 14057/17, 30 January 2020, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.


9.  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' conditions of detention were inadequate.


10.  The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy in respect of these complaints.


11.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.

  1. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION


12.  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."


13.  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law (see, in particular, Sukachov, cited above, §§ 165 and 167), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

  1. Decides to join the applications;
  2. Declares the applications admissible;
  3. Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law;
  4. Holds

(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 20 July 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

 

 Viktoriya Maradudina Carlo Ranzoni

 Acting Deputy Registrar President

 

 

 


APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention

(inadequate conditions of detention and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law)

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant's name

Year of birth

Representative's name

and location

Facility

Start and end date

Duration

Sq. m

per inmate

Specific grievances

Amount awarded

for pecuniary and

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

  1.    

50415/21

03/10/2021

Volodymyr Oleksandrovych SHVETS

1982

Zakutniy Volodymyr Ivanovych

Dnipro

Dnipro Detention Facility no. 4

30/05/2011

pending

More than 12 years and

9 days

2.2-3.2 m²

overcrowding, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to shower

7,500

  1.    

52787/21

03/10/2021

Ruslan Volodymyrovych BONDARENKO

1985

Zakutniy Volodymyr Ivanovych

Dnipro

Dnipro Detention Facility no. 4

26/05/2011

pending

More than 12 years and

13 days

2.8-3.7 m²

overcrowding, lack of fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to potable water

7,500

  1.    

52790/21

03/10/2021

Vitaliy Volodymyrovych ONYSHCHENKO

1992

Zakutniy Volodymyr Ivanovych

Dnipro

Dnipro Detention Facility no. 4

14/11/2019 to

03/11/2021

1 year and 11 months and 21 days

2.5 m²

overcrowding, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of privacy for toilet, passive smoking

4,900

  1.    

56552/21

08/11/2021

Vitaliy Anatoliyovych SVISTUNOV

1977

Rybiy Sergiy Mykolayovych

Dnipro

Kryvyy Rig Detention Facility No. 3

04/03/2014

pending

More than 9 years and 3 months and 4 days

4 m²

lack of fresh air, passive smoking, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of privacy for toilet

7,500

  1.    

56555/21

08/11/2021

Anatoliy Oleksiyovych NYZHNYK

1994

Rybiy Sergiy Mykolayovych

Dnipro

Kryvyy Rig Detention Facility No. 3

14/02/2014

pending

More than 9 years and 3 months and 25 days

4 m²

lack of fresh air, passive smoking, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to potable water

7,500

  1.    

56557/21

08/11/2021

Dmytro Viktorovych ZHALDAK

1980

Rybiy Sergiy Mykolayovych

Dnipro

Kryvyy Rig Detention Facility No. 3

19/01/2013

pending

More than 10 years and

4 months and 20 days

4 m²

lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to shower, passive smoking, lack of privacy for toilet

7,500

  1.    

61072/21

10/12/2021

Leonid Mikhaylovich ROVNYAGIN

1980

Rybiy Sergiy Mykolayovych

Dnipro

Kryvyy Rig Detention Facility No. 3

19/01/2013

pending

More than 10 years and

4 months and 20 days

4.33 m²

 passive smoking, lack of fresh air, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of potable water, no or restricted access to shower, lack of toiletries

7,500

  1.    

7516/22

28/01/2022

Oleksandr Mykolayovych KLYSHTA

1980

Pustyntsev Andriy Vitaliyovych

Dnipro

Chernigiv Detention Facility

22/02/2018

pending

More than 5 years and 3 months and 17 days

2.5 m²

overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, lack of privacy for toilet, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to shower

7,500

  1.    

7519/22

28/01/2022

Oleksandr Anatoliyovych TARASYUK

1983

Pustyntsev Andriy Vitaliyovych

Dnipro

Chernigiv Detention Facility

25/01/2018

pending

More than 5 years and 4 months and 14 days

2.8 m²

overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to shower

7,500


 

 


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


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2023/617.html