THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Applications nos. 11493/19 and 39879/19
Aleksey Ivanovich KOLESNIKOV against Russia
and Vyacheslav Mikhaylovich GUZIYEV against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 19 November 2020 as a Committee composed of:
Darian Pavli, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Peeter Roosma, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”).
THE LAWJoinder of the applications
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.Complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (excessive length of pre-trial detention)
The applicants complained that their pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long. They relied on Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, which read as follows:
Article 5 § 3
“3. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 (c) of this Article shall be ... entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial.”
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).
Turning to the circumstances of the present cases, the Court notes that while extending the applicants’ detention the domestic courts had relied on the existence of a reasonable suspicion of their involvement in aggravated and violent offences, including those committed within an organised armed group during a period of time covering more than ten years and in the territory of several regions of the Russian Federation (for Mr Guziyev), with additional counts of criminal activities having been discovered in the course of the investigation. The courts also took into account the complexity of the criminal cases against the applicants and the existence of a serious risk of their absconding or interfering with justice, confirmed, inter alia, by the pattern of their behaviour, or organised nature of the crimes, extensive connection to the criminal underworld, financial resources and previous documented attempts to tamper with witnesses. The courts also attributed weight to the vulnerability of the victims and witnesses and the threats mounted against them by co-defendants in the case of Mr Guziyev. The Court is satisfied that the domestic courts cited specific facts in support of their conclusions that the applicants were liable to obstruct justice, to re-offend or abscond. They also considered a possibility of applying alternative measures to the applicants but found them to be inadequate. The domestic courts duly examined all the pertinent factors and gave “relevant” and “sufficient” reasons to justify the applicants’ continued detention. The Court further finds that the domestic authorities displayed “special diligence” in the conduct of the proceedings (see, for example, Khloyev v. Russia, no. 46404/13, §§ 96-107, 5 February 2015; Topekhin v. Russia, no. 78774/13, 10 May 2016; Sopin v. Russia, no. 57319/10, 18 December 2012; and Isayev v. Russia, no. 20756/04, 22 October 2009).
In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Declares the applications inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 10 December 2020.
Liv TigerstedtDarian Pavli
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
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
Period of detention
Court which issued detention order/examined appeal
Length of detention
11493/19
25/01/2019
Aleksey Ivanovich KOLESNIKOV
1977
14/03/2018
to
08/05/2019
Ostrogozhskiy District Court of Voronezh Region;
Voronezh Region Court
1 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 25 day(s)
39879/19
01/07/2019
Vyacheslav Mikhaylovich GUZIYEV
1966
14/03/2017
pending
Usinsk Town Court of the Komi Republic;
Supreme Court of the Komi Republic
More than
3 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 11 day(s)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy