THIRD SECTION
Applications nos. 2316/09 and 9605/09
Gocha KEKELIDZE against Georgia
and Aleksandre TCHUMBURIDZE against Georgia
lodged on 15 December 2008
and 2 December 2008 respectively
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. The applicants are Georgian nationals (see the annex). The facts of their cases, as submitted by them, may be summarised as follows.
A. Kekelidze v. Georgia, no. 2316/09
2. On 2 September 2008 at 10:05 a.m. the applicant was arrested on suspicion of drug possession. According to his detention and personal search record, he physically resisted the police and the latter had to use force for the purpose of effecting his arrest. As a result, the applicant sustained injuries to his face and both legs. The applicant claimed that he had shown no resistence but nevertheless had been violently thrown to the ground and severely beaten by police. He alleged that his ill-treatment had also continued upon his transfer to the police department.
3. On the same date, at 17:35 p.m. the applicant underwent an external visual examination upon his being taken to Batumi no. 1 temporary detention centre. A report drawn up thereafter recorded several bruises on the applicant’s body. A note was also made to the effect that the applicant had sustained those injuries during the arrest. Less than three hours later an ambulance was called for the applicant. He was diagnosed as suffering from concussion and was recommended for a transfer to a medical establishment. An hour later an ambulance was called again. After having examined the applicant, he was additionally diagnosed with a closed head injury; bruises were noted on his chest and waist area and he was recommended in-patient treatment in a neurosurgical wing of a hospital.
4. At 22:10 p.m. the applicant was transferred to Batumi no. 1 hospital. After having a brain tomography examination and other medical check-ups the applicant’s diagnosis of a head injury was confirmed. Further, he was diagnosed with skull fracture, multiple bruises and excoriations on his face and the body. Despite the seriousness of the applicant’s condition, he was transferred back to the temporary detention centre.
5. On the same night the applicant’s lawyer called the office of the Prosecutor General of Georgia, via a telephone hot line, complaining about the applicant’s alleged ill-treatment. On 4 September 2008 criminal proceedings were initiated under Article 118 § 2 of the Criminal Code of Georgia (causing less serious bodily injury). The applicant’s lawyer has subsequently filed several complaints about the inadequacy of the investigation, to no avail however. As it appears from the case file, most of his complaints were left unanswered.
6. In January 2009 the applicant underwent a psychiatric forensic examination and was diagnosed with organic personality disorder.
7. On 18 March 2009 the Batumi City Court convicted the applicant for drug offences and sentenced him to fourteen years and three months’ imprisonment and a fine. His conviction was confirmed by the Kutaisi Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Georgia on 23 September and 18 November 2009 respectively. It is unclear from the case file what the outcome of the proceedings into the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment was, if any.
B. Tchumburidze v. Georgia, 9605/09
8. On 8 September 2006 the applicant was arrested on charges of unlawful purchase and possession of explosive devices and attempted terrorist act aimed at detonating an explosive device in front of the office of a ruling political party, offences under Articles 236 and 323 of the Criminal Code of Georgia respectively. The applicant protested his innocence and claimed that he had been lured by his acquaintance D.A. into a trap. He further complained that he had been beaten by police with the aim of extracting a confession from him and implicating in the terrorist plot one of the opposition political parties – “Justice” and its leader I.G.
9. On 9 September 2006 upon his transfer to the Tbilisi temporary detention centre the applicant underwent a visual examination. As a result several bruises were identified on his body.
10. On 20 December 2006 the applicant sent a letter to the General Prosecutor of Georgia, maintaining his innocence and denouncing the investigation as procedurally flawed. He further complained about his alleged ill-treatment, reiterating the motive behind his beating. The applicant maintained his ill-treatment allegations in several subsequent complaints sent to the General Prosecutor, to no avail however; his letters have been left unanswered.
11. On 17 May 2007 the Tbilisi City Court convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment and a fine. The trial judge, despite the applicant voicing his ill-treatment allegations, rejected the request for the questioning of a doctor of the Tbilisi temporary detention centre.
12. On 28 November 2007 the Tbilisi Court of Appeal confirmed the applicant’s conviction. The appellate court similarly dismissed the request to question the doctor in connection with the applicant’s injuries. By a decision of 28 July 2008 the Supreme Court of Georgia rejected the applicant’s appeal on points of law as inadmissible.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained under Article 3 of the Convention that they had been ill-treated by police and that no effective investigations had been conducted into their allegations. The first applicant also denounced under Article 5 of the Convention his unlawful detention, whilst both applicants challenged under Article 6 of the Convention the outcome of the criminal proceedings conducted against them.
COMMON QUESTIONS
1. Were the applicants subjected to ill-treatment by police, in violation of Article 3 of the Convention?
2. Have the competent domestic authorities conducted an adequate investigation into the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment, as required by the procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000-IV)?
APPENDIX
No.
Application
no.
Lodged on
Applicant name
date of birth
place of residence
Represented by
Additional complaints
2316/09
15/12/2008
Gocha KEKELIDZE
11/01/1977
Village Urekhi
- Ms Nana ANDGHULADZE
- Mr Gela GHOGHOBERIDZE
The applicant complained under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention about the unlawfulness of his detention and conviction.
9605/09
02/12/2008
Aleksandre TCHUMBURIDZE
25/09/1968
Rustavi
- Mr Lotberd KUPATADZE
The applicant challenged under Article 6 §§ 1 and 2 of the Convention the outcome of the criminal proceedings conducted against him.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy