SECOND SECTION
CASE OF VOLOGDIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 60802/19 and 46 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
18 April 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Vologdin 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 28 March 2024,
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 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 ARTICLEs 3 and 13 OF THE CONVENTION on account of confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom7. 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.”
Some applicants also complained that they had not had an effective domestic remedy in respect of their grievance under Article 3, contrary to Article 13 of the Convention, which reads 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.”
8. 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, no. 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.
9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, and having taken into account the issue of compliance with the six-month time-limit under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Saakashvili v. Georgia (dec.), nos. 6232/20 and 22394/20, §§ 46-59, 1 March 2022, in which the Court addressed the COVID-related extension of the period in question), 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. 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-LAW12. 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, §§ 103‑08 and 154-58, 22 May 2012, concerning inadequate conditions of transport and lengthy review of detention; Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 92-156, 9 April 2019, concerning the lack of an effective remedy in respect of the complaints about conditions of transport; Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018, concerning administrative detention beyond the three hours’ time-limit; Krestovskiy v. Russia, no. 14040/03, 28 October 2010, concerning the lack of a public hearing; and Resin v. Russia, no. 9348/14, §§ 39-41, 18 December 2018, concerning refusal of long-term family visits in remand prisons).
REMAINING COMPLAINTS13. Mr Rud (application no. 22446/20) also raised additional complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.
14. The Court has examined the complaints 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, they either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto. It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION15. 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 applications nos. 11726/20 and 55085/21 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.
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 complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the applicants’ placement in a metal cage in the courtrooms during the criminal proceedings against them and lack of an effective domestic remedy to complain about it, as well as the complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see the appended table) admissible, and the remaining complaints raised in application no. 22446/20 inadmissible;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 well-established case-law of the Court (see the appended table);Holds that it is not necessary to deal separately with the applicants’ complaints under Article 13 of the Convention related to the lack of an effective domestic remedy to complain about placement in a metal cage in courtrooms;Holds that the finding of a violation constitutes in itself sufficient just satisfaction for the non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants in applications nos. 11726/20 and 55085/21;Holds(a) that the respondent State is to pay the remaining 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 April 2024, 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/Final date of placement in a cage
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
60802/19
15/11/2019
Yevgeniy Vladimirovich VOLOGDIN
1986
Petrov Roman Nikolayevich
Cheboksary
Prikubanskiy District Court of Krasnodar and Krasnodar Regional Court, Videolink from SIZO-1, Krasnodar Region
16/07/2019
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - Inadequate conditions of transport in a van, train and transit cells between 22/08/2019-02/09/2019 with 0.3 m² per inmate, no ventilation, inadequate temperature, absence of safety belts in a van, overcrowding, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, passive smoking, lack or insufficient quantity of food,
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of transport
8,500
61036/19
19/11/2019
Grigoriy Alekseyevich SMYKOV
1983
Kolesov Stanislav Yuryevich
Slobodskoy
Leninskiy and Oktyabrskiy District Courts of Kirov
11/06/2019
7,500
64574/19
29/11/2019
Andrey Olegovich FILIPPOV
1981
Zhikova Yelena Aleksandrovna
Uray
Court of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Region - Yugra
30/05/2019
7,500
917/20
17/12/2019
Aleksandr Viktorovich LARIN
1985
Miller Irina Vladimirovna
Kansk
Zabaykalskiy Regional Court, Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (by videoconference from the cage of SIZO)
10/07/2019
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport – by train, 10 days, 29/07/2019 - 22/08/2019; lack of fresh air, insufficient number of sleeping places, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to warm water, overcrowding, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water
8,500
1076/20
13/12/2019
Aleksandr Vasilyevich YAKUBENKOV
1995
Shukhardin Valeriy Vladimirovich
Moscow
Leninskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod and the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, video link from SIZO‑1, Nizhniy Novgorod Region
03/07/2019
7,500
1840/20
12/12/2019
Sergey Vladimirovich YURIN
1975
Petrov Roman Nikolayevich
Cheboksary
Pavlovo Town Court of Nizhniy Novgorod Region (hearings in person)
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court (video link from SIZO-1 Nizhniy Novgorod, 19/09/2019
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transport by van in s single-occupancy cell; from 20/12/2017 to 19/08/2019; 0.3 sq. m of personal space; lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to toilet, lack of space;
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of placement in respect of inadequate conditions of transport
8,500
2867/20
17/12/2019
Vasiliy Ivanovich PORTNOV
1964
Miller Irina Vladimirovna
Kansk
Tungussko-Chunskiy District Court of the Krasnoyarsk Region
29/07/2019
7,500
4276/20
27/01/2020
Maksim Olegovich MAKSIMOV
1984
Galtseva Margarita Valeryevna
Saratov
Balakovskiy District Court of the Saratov Region
Proceedings pending on the date of lodging the application form with the Court
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transport of the applicant on numerous occasions between the detention facility and the courthouse or to take part in investigative actions; ongoing since 30/10/2019 on the date when the application form was lodged with the Court; van; restricted access to toilet; transfer lasted 2 to 3 hours; 20 to 25 inmates per van having the capacity for 16 persons
8,500
5086/20
17/12/2019
Ruslan Vladimirovich GURULEV
1980
Miller Irina Vladimirovna
Kansk
Shilkinskiy District Court of the Zabaykalskiy Region and Zabaykalskiy Regional Court
16/07/2019
7,500
5301/20
21/01/2020
Yevgeniy Andreyevich STOVBA
1987
Yasman Pavel Aleksandrovich
St Petersburg
Pechora Town Court of the Komi Republic
06/09/2019
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transfers in train 26/01/2017 - 23/08/2019 on numerous occasions, between Pechora and Vorkuta; overcrowding, 0.3 sq. m per person, insufficient number of sleeping places, no or restricted access to toilet
8,500
6979/20
29/01/2020
Aleksandr Yevgenyevich PONOMAREV
1985
Semyanovskiy Dmitriy Aleksandrovich
Astrakhan
Akhtubinsk District Court (metal cages during court hearings)
Astrakhan Regional Court (video link from SIZO-1, Astrakhan Region)
15/08/2019
7,500
8496/20
27/01/2020
Anatoliy Anatolyevich UGDYZHEKOV
1979
Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich LOSEV
1974
Tutachikov Vladimir Nikolayevich
Askiz
Askiz District Court of Khakasiya Republic
01/08/2019
7,500
8635/20
30/01/2020
Roman Alekseyevich KOLPASHCHIKOV
2000
Yezhov Yevgeniy Sergeyevich
Velikiy Novgorod
Novgorodskiy District Court of the Novgorod Region
01/08/2019
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - multiple accounts of transport in vans and transit cells (12/04/2019-01/08/2019) with lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to potable water, lack or insufficient quantity of food, passive smoking;
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport
8,500
8706/20
30/01/2020
David Grigoryevich NAZAROV
1985
Myltsyn Dmitriy Andreyevich
Moscow
Golovinskiy District Court of Moscow
Pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court
7,500
11726/20
06/02/2020
Aleksey Mikhaylovich NEMOLYAYEV
1980
Isayev Ayndi Khamzatovich
Krasnoyarsk
Krasnodar Regional Court;
Supreme Court of Russia
20/08/2020
The finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction.
14041/20
04/03/2020
Valentin Aleksandrovich DATSKO
1995
Fedotova Yuliya
Yekaterinburg
Oktyabrskiy District Court of Krasnodar and Krasnodar Regional Court
10/09/2019
7,500
14372/20
27/02/2020
(6 applicants)
Asim Rasim-ogly AKHMEDOV
1985
Sergey Aleksandrovich SLEPTSOV
1984
Yevgeniy Nikolayevich NABIULLIN
1987
Vladislav Fridovich BAYAZITOV
1971
Yakub Ilgarovich VELIYEV
1988
Aleksandr Sergeyevich KISILEV
1989
Laptev Aleksey Nikolayevich
Moscow
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation
Video link from unspecified SIZO
03/09/2019
Art. 8 (1) - lack of practical opportunities for or restriction on prison visits - impossibility to have long family visits for 6 years in the remand prison due to the general policy; complaint raised also by each of the applicants
9,750
14657/20
04/03/2020
Sergey Vladimirovich VASILYEV
1969
Abdrashitov Elik Yevgenyevich
Orel
Vakhitovskiy District Court of Kazan
05/11/2019
7,500
19365/20
18/03/2020
Oleg Vladimirovich MALTSEV
1975
Sergeyeva Yelizaveta Alekseyevna
Tyumen
Kalininskiy District Court of Tyumen
23/09/2019
7,500
20594/20
23/04/2020
Vladislav Timofeyevich NAVITSKIY
1999
Sergeyeva Yelizaveta Alekseyevna
Tyumen
Niznevartovsk Town Court of the Khanty-Mansy Autonomous Region Yugra
13/01/2020
7,500
20892/20
20/02/2020
Andrey Vasilyevich SEMKOVICH
1981
Mironova Tatyana Sergeyevna
St Petersburg
Primorskiy District Court of St Petersburg, St Petersburg City court
11/09/2019
7,500
21278/20
04/05/2020
Vasiliy Yuryevich POVALYAKHIN
1984
Kipkaylov Yevgeniy Sergeyevich
Rostov na Donu
Azov Town Court of the Rostov Region
Rostov Regional Court; Video link from unspecified SIZO; 06/03/2020 and 03/04/2020
7,500
21640/20
06/04/2020
Nikita Vladimirovich NEARONOV
1996
Lashin Sergey Vadimovich
Yekaterinburg
Leninskiy District Court of Chelyabinsk
23/12/2019
7,500
21662/20
17/04/2020
Maksim Mikhaylovich BATISHCHEV
1989
Semiguzova Alana Vladimirovna
Chita
Moguchanskiy District Court of the Zabaykalskiy Region and Zabaykalskiy Regional Court
22/10/2019
7,500
22446/20
25/12/2019
Boris Mikhaylovich RUD
1974
Arko Olga Andreyevna
St Petersburg
Oktyabrskiy District Court of St Petersburg and Smolninskiy District Court of St Petersburg;
St Petersburg City Court; video link from SIZO-3, Leningrad Region
16/12/2019
7,500
22886/20
30/04/2020
Sergey Olegovich IGNATYEV
1994
Varava Valentina Yuryevna
Pskov
Detention in a metal cage during the trial hearing held in the courtroom of the Justice of the Peace of Court Circuit no. 28 of Pskov
17/03/2020
7,500
24637/20
06/05/2020
Sergey Mikhaylovich MONOGOV
1977
Yesina Tatyana Robertovna
Sevastopol
Kirovskiy District Court of Khabarovsk
Video link from IK-6, Khabarovsk Region
03/12/2019
7,500
28418/20
07/06/2020
Sarvan Ismail ogly GASANOV
1988
Semyanovskiy Dmitriy Aleksandrovich
Astrakhan
Kirovskiy Disgtrict Court of Astrakhan, Astrakhan Regional Court
Video link from an unidentified facility
19/03/2020
7,500
29121/20
13/07/2020
Andrey Aleksandrovich PROZOROV
1991
Kravchenko Sergey Anatolyevich
Khanty-Mansiysk
Nyagan Town Court of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Region - Yugra
22/11/2019
7,500
29227/20
16/06/2020
Yegor Mikhaylovich KAYMASHNIKOV
1993
Lyubimkin Sergey Ivanovich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Moscow City Court, by way of videoconference from the detention facility
12/12/2019
7,500
29402/20
16/06/2020
Sergey Aleksandrovich FEDOTOV
1978
Lyubimkin Sergey Ivanovich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Moscow City Court, video link from SIZO-4, Moscow
12/12/2019
7,500
30915/20
16/06/2020
Aleksandr Valeryevich KONDRATYEV
1984
Lyubimkin Sergey Ivanovich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Moscow City Court
12/12/2019
7,500
32058/20
21/07/2020
Vladimir Valeryevich TSYGANOV
1976
Dvoryak Vladimir Gennadyevich
Abakan
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, Supreme Court of the Russian Federation
27/02/2020
Art. 6 (1) - trial in camera - hearings both before the trial court (Krasnoyarsk Regional Court) and the appeal court (Supreme Court of the Russian Federation) were held in camera
9,750
34443/20
30/05/2020
Yelena Yevgenyevna ROMANOVA
1982
Pavlenko Tatyana Nodariyevna
St Petersburg
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation; Video link from SIZO-5, Leningrad Region; 25/12/2019
4,450
35432/20
23/07/2020
Sergey Viktorovich MELNIKOV
1976
Kritskaya Olga Innokentyevna
Krasnoyarsk
Sverdlovskiy District and Oktyabrskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk
24/01/2020
7,500
36405/20
17/08/2020
Irina Vsevolodovna KLEMENTYEVA
1963
Makarova Marina Vladimirovna
Strasbourg
Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Region
Video link from SIZO, Chuvashia Region
10/12/2019
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - van (SIZO-2 Chuvashia Republic (Tsivilsk) - IVS Cheboksary - Leninskiy District Court) 10 occasions between 17/07/2019 and 19/12/2019; cramped individual compartments, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to toilet; transfers lasted from 3 to 4 hours; personal space afforded was 0.3 to 0.6 sq. m;
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport
8,500
36744/20
03/08/2020
Pavel Aleksandrovich MATYAKIN
1987
Baygildeyev Rustam Rashitovich
Moscow
Abdulinskiy District Court, the Orenburg Regional Court
06/11/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - The applicant complained of unlawful detention on 22/03/2020 as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO)
9,750
40832/20
27/08/2020
Aleksandr Viktorovich POLUYAN
1977
Blinov Artem Igorevich
Rostov-na-Donu
Rostov Regional Court, Video link from SIZO-1, Rostov Region
26/06/2020
7,500
43264/20
02/09/2020
Sergey Gennadyevich MARIN
1977
Avanesyan Aleksey Viktorovich
Yekaterinburg
Belorechenskiy District Court of the Krasnodar Region, Krasnodar Regional Court
30/07/2020
7,500
44610/20
12/09/2020
Kamil Boreyevich SHAMSUTDINOV
1980
Laptev Aleksey Nikolayevich
Moscow
Chelyabinsk Regional Court and Seventh Court of Cassation, video link from SIZO-1, Chelyabinsk Region
12/12/2019
7,500
51338/20
05/11/2020
Igor Nikolayevich BELSKIY
1987
Pavlov Sergey Eduardovich
Cheboksary
Leninskiy District Court of Cheboksary/Supreme Court of Chuvashia
06/05/2020
7,500
53337/20
12/11/2020
Yuriy Vitalyevich MURZUKOV
1967
Pavlov Sergey Eduardovich
Cheboksary
Novocheboksarsk Town Court and the Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
13/05/2020
7,500
293/21
23/11/2020
Oleg Vladimirovich KORCHUGANOV
1986
Golubenko Andrey Yevgenyevich
Nea Skiony
the Chernogorsk Town Court of the Republic of Khakassia
19/03/2019
the applicant lodged a complaint with a court about the use of a metal cage; final decision by the Supreme Court of Russia issued on 30/07/2020
7,500
1035/21
23/11/2020
Oleg Anatolyevich MAGADEYEV
1980
Golubenko Andrey Yevgenyevich
Nea Skiony
Chitinskiy District Court of the Zabaykalsk Region; Zabaykalsk Regional Court
25/05/2020
7,500
1180/21
14/12/2020
Aleksandr Valeryevich BAKAYEV
1990
Shukhardin Valeriy Vladimirovich
Moscow
the 4th Appellate Court of General Jurisdiction
16/06/2020
7,500
3412/21
09/12/2020
Lyudmila Gennadyevna BUSHUYEVA
1987
Shukhardin Valeriy Vladimirovich
Moscow
Moscow City Court
10/06/2020
7,500
55085/21
18/10/2021
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich GROMOVOY
1983
Dunayeva Alla Igorevna
Chelyabinsk
Kalininskiy District Court of Chelyabinsk, Chelyabinsk Regional Court
16/06/2022
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention – detention order by the Kalininskiy District Court of Chelyabinsk on 29/03/2022; appeal decision by the Chelyabinsk Regional Court on 16/06/2022; lack of speediness of review of detention (Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, §§ 154-158, 22 May 2012)
The finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction.
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.