THIRD SECTION
CASE OF MERZLYACHENKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Application no. 60839/13 and 7 others -
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
4 May 2017
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Merzlyachenko and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Luis López Guerra, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Branko Lubarda, judges,
and Karen Reid, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 30 March 2017,
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 applications were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”).
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. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
I. 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.
II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION
6. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
Article 3
“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
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, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 90‑94, ECHR 2000‑XI, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 139‑165, 10 January 2012). It reiterates in particular that extreme lack of space in a prison cell or overcrowding weighs heavily as an aspect to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the impugned detention conditions were “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many authorities, Karalevičius v. Lithuania, no. 53254/99, §§ 36–40, 7 April 2005).
8. In the leading case of Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013, 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. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
III. REMAINING COMPLAINTS
11. In applications nos. 60839/13, 63289/13, 63379/13, 63440/13, 63632/13 and 63638/13, the applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, in accordance with 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. 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 Sergey Babushkin case (cited above, §§ 38-45).
IV. 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, to its case‑law and the long delay for some of the applicants in filing the application, the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
14. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.
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 Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;
4. Holds that there has been a violation as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);
5. 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 4 May 2017, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Karen ReidLuis López Guerra
RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
(inadequate conditions of detention)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant name
Date of birth
Representative name and location
Facility
Start and end date
Duration
Sq. m. per inmate
Specific grievances
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses
per applicant
(in euros)[1]
60839/13
13/09/2013
Aleksey Vasilyevich Merzlyachenko
01/04/1978
Gordeyeva Margarita Vladimirovna
Astrakhan
IK-2 Astrakhan
31/10/2012
pending
More than 4 year(s) and 5 month(s)
2.4 m²
Low temperature in the dormitory in winter time, 4 pans and 3-5 sinks for 100 inmates, drinking water is not freely supplied, poor quality of food, insects, rodents.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
15,300
63289/13
19/09/2013
Nikolay Georgiyevich Plokhutenko
20/07/1954
IK-30 Perm Region
28/12/2011 to
19/09/2013
1 year(s) and
8 month(s) and
23 day(s)
1.5 m²
No ventilation.
Insufficient space for outdoor exercise, 8 pans and 6 sinks for 130 inmates, no hot water, poor quality of food.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
5,000
63379/13
19/09/2013
Aleksey Mukharamovich Ismagulov
13/08/1979
IK-30 Perm Region
19/05/2011 to
19/09/2013
2 year(s) and
4 month(s) and 1 day(s)
1.5 m²
No ventilation, 8 pans and 6 sinks for 130 inmates, no hot water, 10 showers and 1 hour to use them for 130 inmates, poor quality of food, insufficient space for outdoor exercise.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
5,000
63440/13
18/09/2013
Aleksandr Yuryevich Pisanko
27/08/1986
IK-30 Perm Region
15/10/2011 to
18/09/2013
1 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 4 day(s)
1.5 m²
No ventilation.
8 pans, 6 sinks for 130 inmates, no hot water.
10 showers and 1 hour to use them for 130 inmates.
Poor quality of food.
Insufficient space for outdoor exercise.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
5,000
63632/13
19/09/2013
Firudin Ramazanovich Mekhdiyev
12/10/1981
IK-30 Perm Region
15/12/2011 to
17/09/2013
1 year(s) and
9 month(s) and 3 day(s)
1.5 m²
No ventilation, 8 pans, 6 sinks for 130 inmates, 10 showers and 1 hour to use them for 130 inmates, poor quality of food, insufficient space for outdoor exercise.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
5,000
63638/13
19/09/2013
Ivan Konstantinovich Moskaltsov
14/10/1951
IK-30 Perm Region
24/11/2011 to
18/09/2013
1 year(s) and
9 month(s) and
26 day(s)
1.5 m²
No ventilation, 8 pans and 6 sinks for 130 inmates, 10 showers and 1 hour to use them for 130 inmates, poor quality of food, insufficient space for outdoor exercise.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
5,000
80928/13
29/11/2013
Sergey Nikolayevich Dolbin
14/02/1976
IK-7-28 Kirov Region
18/01/2012
pending
More than 5 year(s) and 2 month(s) and
13 day(s)
2.5 m²
Poor quality of water, almost no access to natural light.
15,300
38267/15
18/07/2015
Stepan Anatolyevich Derzibashev
10/02/1991
Alekseyeva Natalya Vasilyevna
Krsanoyarsk
IK-17 Krasnoyarsk
18/10/2010 to
21/07/2011
9 month(s) and 4 day(s)
IK-30 Norilsk Krasnoyarsk Region
25/07/2011 to
02/02/2015
3 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 9 day(s)
1.1 m²
No ventilation, lack of sanitary facilities.
No ventilation, high humidity, no privacy when using lavatory, the applicant’s bed was 1 m away from the lavatory, 5 sinks and 5 pans for
130-170 inmates.
5,000
[1]. Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy