Published on 27 March 2023
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 56727/18
Azamat Rinatovich KAYUMOV and Others against Russia
and 8 other applications
(see list appended)
PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 2 March 2023, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the applications should be given to the Government of Russia.
In the applications marked by an asterisk, other complaints were raised. This part of the applications has been struck out of the Court’s list of cases or declared inadmissible by the Court, sitting in a single-judge formation, assisted by a rapporteur as provided for in Article 24 § 2 of the Convention.
In the enclosed list of applications, whenever an applicant is referred to using initials, this indicates that the Court has authorised anonymity for that person, whose identity will not be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4).
For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website.
SUBJECT MATTER
The applications concern the complaints raised under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention relating to the restrictions on family visits in pre-trial detention facilities which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Andrey Smirnov v. Russia, no. 43149/10, §§ 35-57, 13 February 2018, Resin v. Russia, no. 9348/14, 18 December 2018, Chaldayev v. Russia, no. 33172/16, 28 May 2019, Pshibiyev and Berov v. Russia, no. 63748/13, 9 June 2020 and Mukhametov and others v. Russia, nos. 53404/18 and 3 others, 14 December 2021).
APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS
List of applications raising complaints under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention
(restrictions on family visits in pre-trial detention facilities)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Detention facility
Type of restriction
Other relevant information
Other complaints under well‑established case-law
56727/18*
19/11/2018
Household
Azamat Rinatovich KAYUMOV
1982
Samira Azamatovna KAYUMOVA
2010
Shakira Abdulkhayevna KAYUMOVA
1958
SIZO-3 Bashkortostan Republic
refusal of long-term family visits
Refusal of long-term family visits (Andrey Smirnov v. Russia, no. 43149/10, §§ 39-43, 13 February 2018)
Art. 13 - lack of an effective remedy against refusals of long-term family visits
668/19*
08/12/2018
Household
Radik Mudarisovich AKHMETOV
1976
Gulnara Fayzelgayanovna AKHMETOVA
1974
Abdurakhman Radikovich AKHMETOV
2015
Amir Radikovich AKHMETOV
2009
Karim Radikovich AKHMETOV
2011
SIZO-1 Republic of Bashkortostan,
SIZO-3 Republic of Bashkortostan
refusal of long-term family visits
The first applicant was a defendant in a criminal case. His wife is the second applicant. The remaining three applicants are their children. Their repeated requests for long-term family visits were to no avail.
Art. 13 - lack of an effective remedy against refusals of long-term family visits
37713/20*
07/08/2020
Household
Rinat Ranifovich NURLYGAYANOV
1991
Mukhammad Rinatovich NURLYGAYANOV
2013
Gulnaz Uralovna NURLYGAYANOVA
1990
Milyausha Vilovna NURLYGAYANOVA
1969
Rayana Rinatovna NURLYGAYANOVA
2015
SIZO-1 Ufa,
SIZO-3 Sterlitamak,
SIZO-5 Durtuli,
SIZO-4 Birsk
refusal of long-term family visits;
refusal of short-term family visits
The applicant was detained in different remand prisons between 04/02/2015 and 22/10/2020 without long-term family visits.
Art. 13 - lack of an effective remedy against refusals of short-term family visits and in respect of long-term family visits in pre-trial detention
Art. 14 - in conjunction with Art. 8 - discriminatory treatment compared with convicted prisoners as regards duration of short-term family visits and absence of long-term family visits - The complaint raised only by the first applicant. He complains about discrimination in respect of long-term visits in comparison with convicted prisoners (Chaldayev v. Russia (no. 33172/16, §§ 66 83, 28 May 2019)
42078/20
07/08/2020
Ilkin Elshanovich SALIMOV
1994
Ayndi Khamzatovich Isayev
Krasnoyarsk
SIZO-1 Krasnoyarsk
limitation on duration of short-term family visits, refusal of long-term family visits, physical separation during short-term family visits
detention period: 10/05/2017-pending; family members: partner, mother, father
Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - Krasnoyarsk Regional Court - 24/09/2020
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention:
1) detention order - 24/09/2020, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court; appeal - 22/10/2020, Fifth Appeal Court;
2) detention order - 25/03/2021, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court; Fifth Appellate Court, 19/05/2021, (lodged an appeal on 29/03/2021)
Art. 5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate compensation, for the violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention
Art. 14 - in conjunction with Art. 8 - discriminatory treatment compared with convicted prisoners as regards duration of short-term family visits and absence of long-term family visits
55929/20
17/11/2020
Roman Aleksandrovich KARETNIKOV
1986
SIZO-1 Arkhangelsk
refusal of long-term family visits, physical separation during short-term family visits, limitations on the duration of short-term family visits
detention period – since 26/05/2015; family members - wife, minor child
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - detention order - 28/12/2020, Arkhangelsk Regional Court; appeal - 04/02/2021, Second Appeal Court
Art. 14 - in conjunction with Art. 8 - discriminatory treatment compared with convicted prisoners as regards duration of short-term family visits and absence of long-term family visits
13761/21*
20/02/2021
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich DANILOV
1985
SIZO-1 Arkhangelsk Region
refusal of long-term family visits, physical separation and supervision during short-term family visits, limitation on the frequency of short-term family visits
In detention since 26/05/2015. His relevant complaints were dismissed by the domestic authorities.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of refusals of long-term family visits
Art. 14 - in conjunction with Art. 8 - discriminatory treatment compared with convicted prisoners as regards duration of short-term family visits and absence of long-term family visits
21878/21*
02/04/2021
Oksana Viktorovna PIMENOVA
1973
SIZO-3 Samara, SIZO-2 Syzran, SIZO-4 Tolyatti,
IVS Samara
07/07/2014 - 22/01/2021
physical separation and supervision during short-term family visits, refusal of long-term family visits
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of placement in a metal cage during court hearings and in respect of restrictions on family visits in pre-trial detention facilities
Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - Applicant’s placement in a metal cage during the hearings in the Zheleznogorskiy District Court of Samara and Samara Regional Court from 07/07/2014 to 03/12/2020
Art. 14 - in conjunction with Art. 8 - discriminatory treatment compared with convicted prisoners as regards duration of short-term family visits and absence of long-term family visits
21945/21*
01/04/2021
Household
Artur Aleksandrovich KUPREISHVILI
1989
Zhanna Dzhanikovna KUPREISHVILI
1968
SIZO-1 Arkhangelsk Region
refusal of long-term family visits, physical separation and supervision during the short-term family visits, limitation on the frequency of short-term family visits
complaint is lodged by both applicants (son and mother). The first applicant has been in pre-trial detention since 31/12/2014.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of placement in a metal cage during court hearings and in respect of refusals of long-term family visits and restrictions during short-term family visits; the complaint is lodged by both applicants
Art. 14 - prohibition of discrimination - in conjunction with Art. 8 - discriminatory treatment compared with convicted prisoners as regards restrictions during short-term family visits and absence of long-term family visits; the complaint is lodged by both applicants
Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - the first applicant has been held in a glass cabin during the hearings by the Archangelsk Regional Court since 25/01/2021 with the personal space afforded 0.6 sq. m
30587/21*
27/05/2021
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich ATAYEV
1977
Nikita Aleksandrovich Tugov
Moscow
SIZO-4 Moscow
refusal of short-term family visits; refusal of phone calls to his family since 08/12/2018
Visits refused for the entire period of detention on remand as of 08/12/2018. Lodged Art. 125 complaint, to no vail.
Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - kept in a metal cage and in a glass cabin in Tverskoy District Court of Moscow and Moscow City Court during the hearings concerning determination of the criminal charge and pre-trial detention between 11/11/2020 and 08/04/2021
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - conditions of detention in a van and in transit cells at the courts from 11/11/2019 to 08/04/2021; applicant transported on numerous occasions, each trip lasting 4 hours, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to toilet, lack or insufficient quantity of food, overcrowding, passive smoking, no or restricted access to potable water, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease, transported in handcuffs
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - Moscow City Court, 11/02/2021, upheld by First Appellate Court on 18/03/2021
Art. 5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate compensation, for the violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (the complaint under Article 5 § 3 concerning the applicant’s pre-trial detention form 08/12/2018 to 08/04/2021 has already been communicated (application no. 10206/20)
Art. 5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate compensation, for the violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention