THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 11584/17
Dmitriy Yegorovich KOZHUKHOV against Russia
and 2 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 13 September 2018 as a Committee composed of:
Alena Poláčková, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Jolien Schukking, 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 in applications nos. 11584/17 and 41921/17,
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 LAW
A. Joinder 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.
B. Complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention
In the present applications, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the alleged violation of the Convention.
In particular, the Court notes the relatively short duration of the pre-trial detention for some of the applicants. It further observes that while extending the applicants’ detention the domestic courts had relied on the existence of a reasonable suspicion of their involvement in aggravated criminal offences, the particular vulnerability of the victims, 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 their significant financial resources or serious ties to the criminal underworld (see Rydz v. Poland, no. 13167/02, 18 December 2007). 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, but found them to be inadequate at the time. The domestic courts duly examined all the pertinent factors and gave “relevant” and “sufficient” reasons to justify the applicants’ continued detention. The Court also 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 the applicants’ 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 4 October 2018.
Liv TigerstedtAlena Poláčková
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Date of birth
Representative’s name and location
Period of detention
Court which issued detention order/examined appeal
11584/17
26/01/2017
Dmitriy Yegorovich Kozhukhov
09/10/1990
Sheremetyev Yevgeniy Valeryevich
Moscow
08/01/2016 to
02/09/2016
7 months and 26 days
23212/17
09/03/2017
Irakliy Gochayevich Iosava
06/11/1989
02/07/2015 to
07/12/2016
1 year and 5 months and 6 days
41921/17
23/05/2017
Asgat Khasanovich Khafizov
04/05/1985
14/10/2014 to
08/12/2017
3 years and 1 month and 25 days
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy