THIRD SECTION
CASE OF SHARINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 11075/17 and 16 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
6 February 2025
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Sharina and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Diana Kovatcheva, President,
Úna Ní Raifeartaigh,
Mateja Đurović, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 16 January 2025,
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 of the excessive length of their pre-trial detention. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention and its Protocol.
THE LAW
JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
Jurisdiction6. 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 ARTICLE 5 § 3 OF THE CONVENTION7. The applicants complained principally that their pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long. They relied on Article 5 § 3 of the Convention.
8. The Court observes that the general principles regarding the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, have been stated in a number of its previous judgments (see, among many other authorities, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000‑XI, and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, §§ 41-44, ECHR 2006‑X, with further references).
9. In the leading case of Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
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 length of the applicants’ pre-trial detention was excessive.
11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention.
OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW12. Some 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. 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 Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, §§ 154-58, 22 May 2012, as regards lengthy review of detention matters; Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts), concerning detention in a metal cage during court hearings; Shtukaturov v. Russia, no. 44009/05, §§ 135-149, ECHR 2008, regarding hindrance in the exercise of the right of individual petition; Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, §§ 72-83, 4 June 2015, relating to delayed review of conviction by a higher court; Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, ECHR 2016 (extracts), with regard to disproportionate measures against participants of public assemblies; Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 58-85, 20 September 2016, concerning the absence of a prosecuting party in the proceedings under the Code of Administrative Offences (CAO); Ovakimyan v. Russia, no. 52796/08, § 40, 54, 57, 21 February 2017, regarding unlawful detention; Stomakhin v. Russia, no. 52273/07, §§ 73-134, 9 May 2018, as to criminal conviction for inciting to hatred and extremist activity; Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 92-156, 9 April 2019, as regards conditions of transport of detainees; Elvira Dmitriyeva v. Russia, nos. 60921/17 and 7202/18, §§ 77‑90, 30 April 2019, as to administrative conviction for making calls to participate in public assemblies; and Gorlov and Others v. Russia, nos. 27057/06 and 2 others, 2 July 2019, concerning permanent video surveillance of detainees.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION13. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Pastukhov and Yelagin v. Russia, no. 55299/07, 19 December 2013), 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 these applications 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 5 § 3 of the Convention concerning the unreasonably long pre-trial detention;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(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 6 February 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Diana Kovatcheva
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention
(excessive length of pre-trial detention)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Period of detention
Court which issued detention order/examined appeal
Length of detention
Specific defects
Other complaints under well‑established case‑law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
11075/17
28/01/2017
Natalya Grigoryevna SHARINA
1957
Olenichev Maksim Vladimirovich
St Petersburg
29/10/2015 to
05/06/2017
Meshchanskiy District Court of Moscow, Presnenskiy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court
1 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 8 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention:
Detention order by the Presnenskiy District Court of Moscow on 26/08/2016, appeal lodged on 07/09/2016, appeal decision by the Moscow City Court on 29/09/2016,
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - criminal conviction under articles 160 and 282 of the Criminal Code for keeping books and CDs allegedly inciting hatred (the applicant was the director of a library); final decision: Moscow City Court, 24/04/2018, 4 years’ imprisonment suspended
6,000
75897/17
13/10/2017
Aleksandr Anatolyevich POTKIN
1976
Khrunova Irina Vladimirovna
Kazan
12/04/2018 -
Pending on
the date
when the
application
was lodged
with the
Court, and
possibly as
of
16/09/2022
Mechshanskiy District Court of Moscow, Domodedovo Town Court of the Moscow Region, Moscow City Court, Moscow Regional Court
4 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 5 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - van, transit cell, 22/01/2018-13/04/2018, < 1 sq. m per inmate; applicant transported on numerous occasions, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to toilet, overcrowding, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of or insufficient electric light,
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention:
Detention order by the Meshchanskiy District Court of Moscow on 12/04/2018, appeal decision by the Moscow City Court on 05/06/2018;
Detention order by the Meshchanskiy District Court of Moscow on
24/04/2018, appeal decision by the Moscow City Court on 05/06/2018
(both appeals considered on the same day);
Detention order by the Domodedovo Town Court of the Moscow Region, on
09/07/2018, appeal decision by the Moscow Regional Court on 23/08/2018,
Art. 8 (1) - permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities - 22/01/2018 - 13/04/2018, FKU SIZO-1,
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - criminal conviction under articles 282, 282 and 282.1 of the Criminal Code for making some publications and participating in the activities inciting hatred between Russians and Kazakhs; final decision: Moscow City Court, 28/03/2018, imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months
6,000
58718/18
14/12/2018
Pavlo Igorovych GRYB
1998
Zakrevska Yevgeniya Oleksandrivna
Kyiv
25/08/2017 to
22/03/2019
Oktyabrskiy District Court of Krasnodar, Severo-Kavkazskiy Circuit Millitary Court, Krasnodar Regional Court
1 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 26 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding;
fragility and repetitiveness of the reasoning employed by the courts as the case progressed
1,700
31472/19
26/05/2019
Vladimir Gennadyevich KOMARNITSKIY
1996
Pleshkov Maksim Alekseyevich
Moscow
26/06/2018
-
Pending on
the date
when the
application
was lodged
with the
Court, and
possibly as
of
16/09/2022
Basmannyy District Court of Moscow, Second Western Circuit Military Court, Moscow City Court, Appellate Military Court
4 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 22 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
collective detention orders
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - metal cage, Basmannyy District Court of Moscow, 11/12/2019,
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - criminal prosecution under articles 205.2, 212, 213, 280, 282 and 282.1 of the Criminal Code for participation in the activities of the Chernyy Blok political movement, in particular, for alleged calls to mass disorders, arrest and detention, proceedings possibly pending as of 16/09/2022,
Art. 34 - hindrance in the exercise of the right of individual petition - The applicant’s lawyer representing him before the ECHR was not allowed to visit him in remand prison, one of the grounds being that he did not exhaust all the domestic remedies, August 2019, complaints under article 125 of the CrPC not accepted for examination on 10/10/2019 and 08/11/2019, upheld on appeal on 11/12/2019
9,750
47739/19
06/09/2019
Aleksey Yuryevich DMITRIYEV
1979
Zimin Aleksandr Vladimirovich
St Petersburg
05/03/2019
-
Pending on
the date
when the
application
was lodged
with the
Court, and
possibly as
of
16/09/2022
Primorskiy District Court of St Petersburg, Vasileostrovskoy District Court of St Peterburg, St Peterburg City Court
3 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 12 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 05/03/2019 from 4 p.m. to 9.50 p.m., raised on 07/09/2019; detention (criminal) for more than three hours without written record (see Ovakimyan v. Russia, no. 52796/08, § 40, 54, 57, 21 February 2017)
4,800
49350/19
06/09/2019
Ismail Makhmudovich NALGIYEV
1991
Sabinin Andrey Vasilyevich
Stavropol
08/05/2019 -
15/12/2021
Yessentuki Town Court of the Stavropol Region, Nalchik Town Court of the Kabardino-Balkar Republic,
Stavropol Regional Court, Supreme Court of the Kabardino-Balkar Republic
2 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 8 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Supreme Court of the Republic of Ingushetia, 13/06/2019,
Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 5 of the CAO for participation in an unauthorised manifestation in Magas against amendments to the law on referendums, Ingushetia, on 26/03/2019; final decision: Supreme Court of the Republic of Ingushetia, 13/06/2019, fine of RUB 20,000
6,000
60670/19
15/11/2019
Akhmed Beslanovich NALGIYEV
1992
Zubeyr Alaudinovich KHAMKHOYEV
1996
Glushkova Tatyana Sergeyevna
Moscow
20/04/2019
-
18/02/2020
23/04/2019 -
14/02/2020
Nalchick Town Court of the Kabardino-Balkar Republic, Supreme Court of the Kabardino-Balkar Republic
9 month(s) and 30 day(s)
9 month(s) and 23 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
1,000 (Mr Nalgiyev)
1,000 (Mr Khamkhoyev)
64428/19
06/12/2019
Abdulmumin Khabirovich GADZHIYEV
1984
Shabanov Arsen Khidirnabiyevich
Makhachkala
14/06/2019 -
Pending on
the date
when the
application
was lodged
with the
Court, and
possibly as
of
16/09/2022
Sovetskiy District Court of Makhachkala, Supreme Court of the Dagestan Republic
3 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 3 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - criminal conviction under articles 282.2, 205.1 and 205.5 of the Criminal Code for publishing an interview with a person helping Syrian refugees and allegedly engaged in Islamic State activities; last known decision: Southern Circuit Military Court of Rostov-on-Don, 12/09/2023 (unclear whether an appeal was lodged),
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention:
Detention order by the Sovetskiy District Court of Makhachkala on
10/09/2019, appeal decision by the Supreme Court of the Dagestan Republic on 07/10/2019
6,000
49353/19
06/09/2019
AND
6369/20
04/12/2019
Khasan Magomedovich KATSIYEV
1988
Sabinin Andrey Vasilyevich
Stavropol
23/04/2019 to
05/03/2020
Nalchik Town Court of the Kabardino-Balkar Republic, Yessentuki Town Court of the Stavropol Region, Stavropol Regional Court, Supreme Court of the Kabardino-Balkar Republic
10 month(s) and 12 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
collective detention orders
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings - final decision: Supreme Court of the Republic of Ingushetia,13/06/2019,
Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - administrative conviction under article 20.2 para. 5 of the CAO for participating in manifestation against amendments to the law on referendum on 26/03/2019, Magas, Republic of Ingushetia, final decision: Supreme Court of the Republic of Ingushetia,13/06/2019, fine of RUB 20,000,
Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - criminal conviction under article 318 of the Criminal Code on account of violence against a public official for participation in a meeting in Magas on 26/03/2019 against amendments to the law on referendum; final decision: Stavropol Regional Court, 13/04/2020, imprisonment of 1 year and 9 months,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - The first-instance court considered it necessary to keep the applicant in detention as a preventive measure pending the entry into force of the conviction even after the prison sentence imposed on him had expired; the time spent in pre-trial detention was taken into account, 1 day in pre-trial detention equal to 2 days in prison, he had to stay in detention until 13/04/2020 when the conviction had entered into force; the applicant’s appeal delayed the entry into force of the conviction; the realisation of the applicant’s right to appeal was at the price of his liberty (see Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 5425/11, paras. 72-83, 4 June 2015)
6,000
6519/20
24/01/2020
Khasan Savarbekovich ZYAZIKOV
1980
Kogan Vanessa
Moscow
18/07/2019 -
17/01/2020
Nalchik Town Court of the Kabardino-Balkaria Republic, Supreme Court of the Kabardino-Balkaria Republic
6 month(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint
Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - criminal prosecution under article 318 of the Criminal Code on account of violence against a public official for participation in a meeting in Magas on 26/03/2019 against amendments to the law on referendum and changing Ingushetia’s frontiers; proceedings possibly pending as of 16/09/2022
4,600
53875/20
17/11/2020
Vadim Kazbekovich CHELDIYEV
1981
Sabinin Andrey Vasilyevich
Stavropol
19/04/2020 to
19/07/2022
Leninskiy District Court of Vladikavkaz, Leninskiy District Court of Rostov-on-Don, Supreme Court of the Osetia-Alania Republic, Rostov Regional Court
2 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 1 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Supreme Court of the Osetia-Alania Republic, 24/07/2020,
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - administrative conviction under article 13.15 § 9 of the CAO for publication in Telegram; final decision: Supreme Court of the Osetia-Alania Republic, 24/07/2020, fine of RUB 75,000,
Art. 11 and Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - criminal conviction under articles 207.1, 212, 280 and 318 of the Criminal Code on account of organisation of mass disorders for calling to participate and participating in an unauthorised meeting against authorities of the North Osetia-Alania Republic, 20/04/2020, Vladikavkaz; final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 20/07/2023, 10 years’ imprisonment
6,000
13054/21
16/02/2021
Ramis Akhmetovich CHIRKINOV
1963
Sabinin Andrey Vasilyevich
Stavropol
04/05/2020 to
19/07/2022
Leninskiy District Court of Rostov-on-Don, Rostov Regional Court
2 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 16 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - criminal conviction under article 212 of the Criminal Code on account of organisation of mass disorders for calling to participate and participating in an unauthorised meeting against authorities of the North Osetia-Alania Republic, 20/04/2020, Vladikavkaz; final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 20/07/2023, 8 years’ imprisonment
6,000
13489/21
17/02/2021
Arsen Tamerlanovich BESOLOV
1991
Sabinin Andrey Vasilyevich
Stavropol
12/05/2020 to
19/07/2022
Leninskiy District Court of Rostov-on-Don, Rostov Regional Court
2 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 8 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - criminal conviction under article 212 of the Criminal Code on account of organisation of mass disorders for calling to participate and participating in an unauthorised meeting against authorities of North Osetia-Alania Republic, 20/04/2020, Vladikavkaz; final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 20/07/2023, imprisonment of 8 years and 6 months
6,000
14565/22
15/02/2022
Lyudmila Petrovna SHTEYN
1996
Sabinin Andrey Vasilyevich
Stavropol
02/02/2021 to
25/08/2021
Preobrazhenskiy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court
6 month(s) and 24 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention:
Detention order by the Basmannyy District Court of Moscow on 21/07/2021, appeal decision by the Moscow City Court on 24/08/2021
1,500
30558/22
07/06/2022
Ruslan Faridpashayevich ABASOV
2022
Bayeva Aleksandra Nikolayevna
Moscow
23/12/2021 -
Pending on
the date
when the
application
was lodged
with the
Court, and
possibly as
of
16/09/2022
Gagarinskiy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court
8 month(s) and 25 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
1,000
39478/23
04/02/2023
Liliya Ayratovna CHANYSHEVA
1982
Berman Daniil Borisovich
Moscow
10/11/2021 -
Pending on
the date
when the
application
was lodged
with the
Court, and
possibly as
of
16/09/2022
Kirovskiy District Court of the Bashkortostan Republic, Basmannyy District Court of Moscow, Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic, Moscow City Court
10 month(s) and 7 day(s)
fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding
1,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.