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 LAWJOINDER 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.JURISDICTION
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).ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLEs 3 and 13 OF THE CONVENTION
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).OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW
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).APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
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,Decides to join the applications;Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with the applicants’ complaints as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022;Declares the applications admissible;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the applicants’ placement in a metal cage before the court during the criminal proceedings against them;Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);Holds that it is not necessary to examine separately the applicants’ complaints under Article 13 of the Convention in relation to the lack of an effective domestic remedy to complain about placement in a metal cage in a courtroom;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 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
1981
Basmannyy 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
1975
Cherepovets Town Court
20/02/2017
7,500
47409/17
25/06/2017
Zhelavdi Nasrudinovich GERIYEV
1993
Yermolayeva 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
1970
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
02/11/2017
7,500
74882/17
26/08/2017
Aleksandr Valeriyevich BOKHONOV
1975
Noginsk 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
1979
Pekteyeva 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
1975
Magomedova 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
1980
Ezhvinskiy 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
1971
Smirnova 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
1988
Andreyev Ashot Aleksandrovich
Syktyvkar
Syktyvkar Town Court
12/02/2018
7,500
39953/18
15/08/2018
Aleksey Feodosyevich OSOKIN
1970
Ryumin Yevgeniy Guryevich
Vologda
Vologda Town Court
17/07/2018
7,500
40611/18
15/08/2018
Pavel Aleksandrovich FOMICHEV
1985
Sokolskiy 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
1987
Justice of the Peace of the Morozovskiy Judicial Circuit of Syktyvkar
23/05/2018
7,500
41691/18
16/08/2018
Vitaliy Vladimirovich VESELKOV
1977
Ikhsanov Albert Flyurovich
Izhevsk
Agryz District Court, Tatarstan Republic
26/10/2018
7,500
41766/18
15/08/2018
Yevgeniy Valeryevich BAZHUKOV
1984
Ezhvinskiy District Court of Syktyvkar
27/11/2019
7,500
42017/18
22/08/2018
Aleksandr Viktorovich ZOLOTAREV
1979
Shirokov Oleg Valeryevich
Nizhniy Tagil
Ordzhonikidzevskiy District Court of Yekaterinburg
21/03/2018
7,500
45962/18
10/09/2018
Semen Romanovich GRYAZEV
1997
Lefortovo District Court of Moscow
08/05/2018
7,500
47301/18
01/07/2019
Sergey Anatolyevich SKOBELIN
1985
Zabaykalskiy Region Court
11/01/2019
7,500
48919/18
01/10/2018
Igor Nikolayevich SEROV
1976
Bor 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
1976
Traktorozavodskiy District Court of Volgograd
22/08/2018
7,500
50630/18
18/10/2018
Maksim Yevgenyevich YEGOROV
1996
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Moskovskiy District Court of Kaliningrad
07/08/2018
7,500
50639/18
18/10/2018
Igor Olegovich ZAGUMENNYY
1989
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Leningradskiy District Court of Kaliningrad
31/07/2018
7,500
51223/18
20/10/2018
Vadim Vladimirovich KASHKIN
1969
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Tsentralnyy District Court of Tyumen
05/06/2018
7,500
51644/18
16/10/2018
Rinat Ildusovich MAMETOV
1989
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Uvatskiy District Court of the Tyumen Region
24/07/2018
7,500
55027/18
24/10/2018
Nikitia Vladimirovich DEMKOV
1999
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Leninskiy District Court of Kaliningrad
05/07/2018
7,500
55422/18
08/11/2018
Aleksandr Vladimirovich BELTYUKOV
1988
Justice 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
1969
Markin 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
1988
Prokofyeva 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
1991
Andreyev 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
1988
Urlashov 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
1985
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Moskovskiy District Court of Kaliningrad
24/05/2018
7,500
55758/18
03/11/2018
Vyacheslav Aleksandrovich KOSTYANYUK
1992
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Surgut Town Court
17/07/2018
7,500
55760/18
08/10/2018
Aleksandr Valentinovich SAKSIN
1963
Leninskiy 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
1959
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Kalininskiy District Court of Tyumen
04/06/2018
7,500
57269/18
21/11/2018
Grigoriy Aleksandrovich PROKOFYEV
1968
Oktyabrskiy District Court of Irkutsk
17/06/2019
7,500
57308/18
29/10/2018
Maksim Vadimovich LUKIN
1994
Surgut Town Court
09/06/2018
7,500
57820/18
19/11/2018
Kirill Viktorovich GOLOVASHKIN
1991
Alekseyenko Dmitriy Andreyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Sormovskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod
03/08/2018
7,500
57831/18
19/11/2018
Andrey Ildarovich GILVANOV
1990
Sormovskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod
03/08/2018
7,500
58064/18
26/11/2018
Tural Orudzh Ogly YUSIFLI
1993
Leninskiy District Court of Tyumen
09/08/2018
7,500
58274/18
28/11/2018
Vasiliy Valerianovich KISKI
1983
Leninskiy 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
1981
Medvedeva 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
1977
Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich
Tyumen
Tsentralnyy District Court of Tyumen
31/08/2018
7,500
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy