 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> POLYAKOVY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 32532/18 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Third Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 685 (18 July 2024) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2024/685.html Cite as: [2024] ECHR 685 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Help]
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF POLYAKOVY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 32532/18 and 8 others -
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
18 July 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Polyakovy and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Ioannis Ktistakis, President,
Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir,
Diana Kovatcheva, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 27 June 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
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, and Pivkina and Others v. Russia (dec.), nos. 2134/23 and 6 others, § 46, 6 June 2023).
7. The applicants complained about their confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom during the criminal proceedings against them. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention.
8. The Court notes that the applicants were kept in a metal cage in the courtroom in the context of the criminal proceedings against them. 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. Similar finding was reached by the Court in respect of the practice of confinement of defendants in metal cages at remand prisons for the purposes of their participation in court hearings carried out via a video link (see Karachentsev v. Russia, no. 23229/11, §§ 50-54, 17 April 2018).
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' confinement in a metal cage before the court during the criminal proceedings against them amounted to degrading treatment.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
11. The 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 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible.
12. 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 Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 256-73, 7 June 2022, concerning the arbitrary criminal prosecution of applicants for peacefully practising the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses in community with others, Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012, concerning of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention, and Misan v. Russia, no. 4261/04, 2 October 2014, concerning a search of the applicant's home conducted in the absence of safeguards.
13. Some applicants also raised other complaints under various Articles of the Convention.
14. The Court has examined the applications listed in the appended table and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention and must therefore be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention, or do not require separate examination in view of the Court's findings in paragraphs 9-10 and 12 above.
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 that the finding of a violation in respect of the first, the second and the fifth applicants in application no. 14706/20 will constitute in itself sufficient just satisfaction (see Ivanov and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 44363/14 and 2 others, § 12, 4 June 2020, and Puzanov v. Russia [Committee], nos. 26895/14 and 2 other applications, § 13, 15 September 2022). It further finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table to the remaining applicants and rejects the remainder of the applicants' claims for just satisfaction.
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 18 July 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Ioannis Ktistakis
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)
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 non-pecuniary damage (in euros)[1] | Amount awarded for costs and expenses (in euros)[2] | |
28/08/2018 | Household Sergey Valeryevich POLYAKOV 1972
Anastasiya Andreyevna POLYAKOVA 1984
| Muzny Petr Geneva
| Azovskiy District Court of Omsk 14/11/2018 | Art. 5 (1) - Unlawful detention - detention order by the Azovskiy District Court of Omsk of 06/07/2018, no reference to any evidence proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion of the applicants' having committed a crime; appeal rejected by the Omsk Regional Court on 16/07/2018,
Art. 5 (3) - Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention - Following arrest on 04/07/2018, detention on remand was extended by the Azovskiy District Court of Omsk on 13/08/2018, 11/09/2018, 14/11/2018; no indication of specific evidence demonstrating the need for continued detention; released on 04/12/2018 under an undertaking not to leave (house arrest),
Art. 9 (1) - Freedom of religion - arbitrary criminal prosecution on charges of extremism for pursuing the activities of a liquidated local religious organisation (LRO) of Jehovah's Witnesses in Omsk despite the decision of the Russian Federation Supreme Court declaring it an extremist organisation and holding religious services of Jehovah's Witnesses
| 9,750 to each applicant | 250 to each applicant | |
30/11/2018 (3 applicants) | Konstantin Viktorovich BAZHENOV 1975
Aleksey Vladimirovich BUDENCHUK 1982
Feliks Khasanovich MAKHAMMADIYEV 1984
| Muzny Petr Geneva
| Frunzenskiy District Court of Saratov Proceedings were pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court | Art. 5 (1) - Unlawful detention - detention orders by the Frunzenskiy District Court of Saratov of 14/06/2018, no reference to any evidence proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion of the applicants' having committed a crime; appeals rejected by the Saratov Regional Court on 25/06/2018,
Art. 5 (3) - Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention - detention on remand extended by the Frunzenskiy District Court of Saratov on 07/08/2018 (upheld on appeal by the Saratov Regional Court on 23/08/2018); no indication of specific evidence demonstrating the need for continued detention,
Art. 9 (1) - Freedom of religion - arbitrary criminal prosecution on charges of extremism for "repeatedly conducting meetings of followers and participants of Jehovah's Witnesses in Saratov, joint singing of Bible hymns, improving skills for carrying out missionary activity, studying of religious literature and other sources of information advocating the religious teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses" | 9,750 to each applicant | 250 to each applicant | |
18/12/2018
and
18/05/2020 | Valeriy Vasilyevich MOSKALENKO 1967 | Muzny Petr Geneva
| Zheleznodorozhnyy District Court of Khabarovsk, Khabarovsk Regional Court (video link) 03/12/2018 | Art. 5 (1) - Unlawful detention - detention order by the Zheleznodorozhnyy District Court of Khabarovsk of 03/08/2018, no reference to any evidence proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion of the applicant's having committed a crime; appeal rejected by the Khabarovsk Regional Court on 20/08/2018,
Art. 5 (3) - Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention - pre-trial detention extended on 08/10/2018 and 03/12/2018 by the Khabarovsk Regional Court; no indication of specific evidence demonstrating the need for continued detention,
Art. 8 (1) - Unlawful search - home search and seizure of the applicant's belongings; authorised on 01/08/2018 by the Zheleznodorozhnyy District Court of Khabarovsk; scope of the search - "documents and other media, electronic or technical equipment and communication devices indicative of the continuation of the activity of the extremist religious organisation Jehovah's Witnesses"; carried out on 02/08/2018; Khabarovsk Regional Court rejected the appeal complaint on 03/09/2018,
Art. 9 (1) - Freedom of religion - arbitrary criminal prosecution on charges of extremism for pursuing the activities of a liquidated LRO of Jehovah's Witnesses by holding religious services of Jehovah's Witnesses, sharing beliefs with others and studying religious publications of Jehovah's Witnesses
| 9,750 | 250 | |
04/01/2019 | Dmitriy Viktorovich BARMAKIN 1974 | Muzny Petr Geneva | Pervorechenskiy District Court of Vladivostok, Primorye Regional Court (video link) Proceedings were pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court | Art. 5 (1) - Unlawful detention - detention order by the Pervorechenskiy District Court of Vladivostok of 30/07/2018, no reference to any evidence proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion of the applicant's having committed a crime; appeal rejected by the Primorye Regional Court on 24/08/2018,
Art. 5 (3) - Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention - detention on remand between 28/07/2018 and 18/10/2019; no indication of specific evidence demonstrating the need for continued detention,
Art. 8 (1) - Unlawful search - home search and seizure of the applicant's belongings on 28/07/2018; search warrant issued on 28/07/2018 by Senior Investigator of Investigating Committee; scope of the search - "objects and documents, including those contained on digital media, monetary resources important to the investigation, literature with extremist content, substances and objects banned from lawful circulation in the Russian Federation"; the final decisions recognising the lawfulness of the search taken by the Nakhodka Town Court on 30/07/2018 and the Primorye Regional Court on 16/10/2018,
Art. 9 (1) - Freedom of religion - arbitrary criminal prosecution on charges of extremism for pursuing the activities of a liquidated LRO of Jehovah's Witnesses in Vladivostok despite the decision of the Russian Supreme Court declaring it an extremist organisation and holding religious services of Jehovah's Witnesses
| 9,750 | 250 | |
08/11/2019 | Irina Gennadyevna BUGLAK 1975 | Muzny Petr Geneva | Partizansk Town Court of the Primorye Region, Primorye Regional Court 16/10/2019 | Art. 5 (1) - Unlawful detention - detention order by the Partizansk Town Court of the Primorye Region of 20/04/2019, no reference to any evidence proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion of the applicant's having committed a crime; appeal rejected by the Primorye Regional Court on 14/05/2019,
Art. 5 (3) - Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention - detention on remand between 20/04/2019 and 16/10/2019 (extension orders of 13/06/2019, 17/07/2019, 17/09/2019); no indication of specific evidence demonstrating the need for continued detention,
Art. 8 (1) - Unlawful search - home search and seizure of the applicant's belongings on 20/04/2019; search warrant issued on 19/04/2019 by Investigator of the Investigating Committee; scope of the search - "literature, religious paraphernalia, bank cards, electronic devices, money obtained by criminal means, items and documents of interest to the investigation, as well as items, articles and materials banned from lawful circulation"; the final decisions recognising the lawfulness of the search taken by the Partizansk Town Court on 23/04/2019 and the Primorye Regional Court on 11/06/2019,
Art. 9 (1) - Freedom of religion - arbitrary criminal prosecution on charges of extremism for pursuing the activities of a liquidated LRO of Jehovah's Witnesses in Partizansk despite the decision of the Russian Supreme Court declaring it an extremist organisation and holding religious services of Jehovah's Witnesses | 9,750 | 250 | |
22/11/2019 | Roman Sergeyevich MAKHNEV 1976 | Muzny Petr Geneva | Kaluzhskiy District Court of the Kaluga Region Proceedings were pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court | Art. 5 (1) - Unlawful detention - detention order by the Kaluzhskiy District Court of the Kaluga Region of 28/06/2019, no reference to any evidence proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion of the applicant's having committed a crime; appeal rejected by the Kaluga Regional Court on 08/07/2019,
Art. 5 (3) - Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention - detention on remand starting from 28/06/2019 (extension orders by the Kaluzhskiy District Court of the Kaluga Region of 26/08/2019 and 24/10/2019); no indication of specific evidence demonstrating the need for continued detention,
Art. 9 (1) - Freedom of religion - arbitrary criminal prosecution on charges of extremism for pursuing the activities of a liquidated LRO of Jehovah's Witnesses in Kaluga despite the decision of the Russian Supreme Court declaring it an extremist organisation, holding religious services of Jehovah's Witnesses, distributing "extremist" literature and sharing his beliefs with others
| 9,750 | 250 | |
17/12/2019 (4 applicants) | Mariya Viktorovna KARPOVA 1980
Marat Nazimovich ABDULGALIMOV 1991
Arsen Nazimovich ABDULLAYEV 1979
Anton Olegovich DERGALEV 1985
| Muzny Petr Geneva | Sovetskiy District Court of Makhachkala Proceedings were pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court | Art. 5 (1) - Unlawful detention - detention orders by the Sovetskiy District Court of Makhachkala of 03/06/2019, no reference to any evidence proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion of the applicants' having committed a crime; appeals rejected by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Dagestan on 21/06/2019,
Art. 5 (3) - Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention - detention on remand starting from 01/06/2019 (extension orders by the Sovetskiy District Court of Makhachkala of 25/07/2019, 24/09/2019); no indication of specific evidence demonstrating the need for continued detention,
Art. 9 (1) - Freedom of religion - arbitrary criminal prosecution on charges of extremism for "entering into a criminal conspiracy and creating in Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, a stable and organised cell pursuing the goals and objectives of the extremist organisation Administrative Centre of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia"
| 9,750 to each applicant | 250 to each applicant | |
16/03/2020 (6 applicants) | Konstantin Viktorovich BAZHENOV 1975
Aleksey Vladimirovich BUDENCHUK 1982
Gennadiy Vasilyevich GERMAN 1969
Roman Aleksandrovich GRIDASOV 1978
Feliks Khasanovich MAKHAMMADIYEV 1984
Aleksey Petrovich MIRETSKIY 1975
| Muzny Petr Geneva | Saratov Regional Court (video link) 20/12/2019 | Art. 5 (1) - Unlawful detention - the applicants were taken into custody in the courtroom following their conviction by the Leninskiy District Court of Saratov on 19/09/2019 as a result of a flagrant denial of justice,
Art. 9 (1) - Freedom of religion - arbitrary criminal prosecution of applicants 3, 4 and 6 (Messrs. German, Gridasov, and Miretskiy) on charges of extremism for pursuing the activities of a liquidated LRO of Jehovah's Witnesses in Saratov despite the decision of the Russian Federation Supreme Court declaring it an extremist organisation, holding religious services of Jehovah's Witnesses, joint singing of Bible hymns, preaching and studying of religious literature advocating the religious teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses
| 9,750 to Messrs. German, Gridasov and Miretskiy
The finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction in respect of Messrs. Bazhenov, Budenchuk and Makhammadiyev | 250 to Messrs. German, Gridasov and Miretskiy |
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.