Communicated on 14 May 2018
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 19147/08
Vladimir Ivanovich LAVRENTYEV against Russia
and 6 other applications
(see list appended)
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicants complained under Article 3 of the Convention that they had been subjected to ill-treatment by State officials and that the State failed to conduct an effective domestic investigation into those incidents. All of the applicants submitted that their attempts to initiate criminal investigation in connection with the incidents proved futile.
The relevant details regarding the applicants’ allegations and their version of factual circumstances are reflected in the attached appendices. The information regarding the alleged breach of the substantive aspect of Article 3 in contained in Appendix no. 1. The reaction of the domestic authorities to the applicants’ complaints is reflected in Appendix no. 2.
The table of cases:
No.
Application number
Introduction date
Name of the applicant(s); date of birth
place of residence
Represented by
1.
19147/08
15/03/2008
Vladimir Ivanovich LAVRENTYEV
02/11/1964
Aleksandriyskaya
2.
16608/10
11/03/2010
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich RAKHMANOV
12/12/1941
Kstovo
The applicant passed on on 28/04/2016, the case is pursued on his behalf by his son Mr Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Rakhmanov, born on 11/12/1970, residing in Kstovo.
COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE
3.
37356/10
01/06/2010
Ilya Vladimirovich MILCHAKOV
05/08/1982
Moscow
Russian
4.
40010/10
21/06/2010
Sergey Yuryevich PASYNKOV
22/05/1968
Yagul
5.
58843/10
06/09/2010
Vladimir Markovich CHIRLIN
18/10/1969
Bor
6.
62846/13
07/10/2013
Dmitriy Konstantinovich BELKIN
17/07/1971
Moscow
Roman Sergeyevich KARPINSKIY
7.
20013/17
22/02/2017
Rafael Damirovich SAFIN
03/01/1994
Kazan
Andrey Vladimirovich SUCHKOV
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Having regard to the injuries found on the applicants after the time spent by them in State custody, have the applicants been subjected to torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Razzakov v. Russia, no. 57519/09, 5 February 2015; Gorshchuk v. Russia, no. 31316/09, 6 October 2015; Turbylev v. Russia, no. 4722/09, 6 October 2015; Fartushin v. Russia, no. 38887/09, 8 October 2015; Aleksandr Andreyev v. Russia, no. 2281/06, 23 February 2016; and Leonid Petrov v. Russia, no. 52783/08, 11 October 2016)?
2. Have the authorities discharged their burden of proof by providing a plausible or satisfactory and convincing explanation of how the applicants’ injuries were caused (see Selmouni, cited above, § 87, and Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000‑VII and Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, § 83 and further, ECHR 2015)?
3. Did the authorities carry out an effective investigation, in compliance with the procedural obligation under Article 3 of the Convention (see Lyapin v. Russia, no. 46956/09, §§ 125-40, 24 July 2014), having regard to:
(a) the investigating authorities’ refusals to open criminal cases and investigate the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment by the State officials, and the overruling of those refusals as unlawful and unsubstantiated by higher investigative authorities or courts, and
(b) the investigating authorities’ inability to implement full investigative measures within the framework of the pre-investigation inquiries, before and/or after amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure introduced by Federal Law no. 23-FZ of 4 March 2013, for example, confrontations, identification parades, searches, and so forth?
No
Application No. and Title
APPENDIX No. 1
Article 3 - Substantive aspect
ARREST
ALLEGED ILL – TREATMENT
EVIDENCE
Date / time
Region /
town /street
Entity
Facts
Date / time
Location
Alleged Facts
Perpetrator(s)
Date
Doc Type
Authority
Description
of Injuries
1.
19147/08
Lavrentyev v. Russia
19/04/2006
Nevinnomysk town, Stavropol Region
Kochubeevskoye Department of the Interior
Arrested on suspicion of robbery
During pre-trial detention, 03/07/2006
IVS Kochubeevskoye, Stavropol Region
Severe beatings for 1.5 hours
Police officers of the Kochubeev-skoye OVD
16/08/2006
Forensic examination report
Forensic Bureau of the Stavropol Region
Multiple injuries in the area of shoulder blade, ribs, tailbone, shin injury, bruises of the scrotum, left shoulder and the forearm, caused by the impact of the hard blunt object.
2.
16608/10
Rakhmanov v. Russia
14/05/2009 morning
The applicant’s house
The applicant’s house was searched and the applicant was allegedly handcuffed, beaten, kicked with the legs on the stomach and head during the search. He was left handcuffed for 2 hours. The applicant’s wife managed to bite the police officer’s shoulder (convicted under Article 318 of the Criminal Code).
police officers, (OMON special forces)
14/05/2009
Forensic Medical Certificate M282
Forensic Bureau of Nizhegorod-skiy Region
Brain concussion, injuries on chest, shoulder, face, abdomen.
3.
37356/10
Milchakov
v. Russia
30/03/2009
City of Samara
Police unit on duty (Leninskiy District ROVD)
30/03/2009- 01/04/2009
In the street, on police department premises (Leninskiy District ROVD)
The applicant was arrested on the street at night in hot pursuit. He was allegedly drunk and resisted arrest.
Police agents
28/10/2009
Official report
IZ 63/1 Samara
Bruise on the right thigh; hematoma on scapula and the right shoulder, paraorbital hematoma; abrasions of soft tissues of face, bruise of the left ear-lobe, fracture of the nose bones; bruise of soft tissue of head.
4.
40010/10
Pasynkov
v. Russia
23/04/2009 -24/04/2009
District Police Unit Leninskiy (ROVD) of Izhevsk
Being handcuffed, the applicant was subjected to beatings on his head, arms and legs. The ill-treatment continued until 3 am, then restarted on 8 am the same day. The applicant was allegedly suffocated with plastic bag and gas mask.
5 police agents
05/11/2009
25/04/2009
29/04/2009
8/05/2009
Medical expert examination
Pre-trial detention intake record
Paramedic of Medical Unit
Investigator’s report
Medical Expert Examination Office
Pre-trial detention IVS
Medical Unit of pre-trial detention facility
Investigation Committee
Bruises on the left shoulder, back, thighs, left buttock.
Scratch under the left eye; hematoma on the left arm from shoulder to elbow, both tights.
Brain concussion, bruise of the utter surface of left shoulder.
Craniocerebral trauma effects; brain concussion; thorax contusion.
5.
58843/10
Chirlin v. Russia
30/06/2009 at 12:00
Tolyatti, when leaving his friend’s apartment
Police unit, Komso-molsky District of Tolyatti
Arrested on suspicion of drug dealing
After apprehension, but before the court sanctioned arrest
Department of the Interior of the Komsomol-sky District of Tolyatti
Violent blows over the body and head, with the hands handcuffed behind the back
Policeman Iv.
03/07/2009
Forensic examination report
Tolyatti Forensic Bureau
Bruise on the breast; abrasion on the right shin. These injuries resulted respectively from "the impact of blow or squeeze by the hard blunt object" and from the "sliding and pressing impact of a hard blunt object with irregular contact surface" "5-9 days before the examination".
6.
62846/13
Belkin v. Russia
24/10/2014
SIZO-2 Moscow
Before transportation from SIZO to the court hearing the applicant was suddenly beaten by disguised agents of special forces (convoy). 2 shots on head, 1 on the stomach, the applicant was overturned, 2 more shots by feet on stomach. Insults, the app.’s hands were pulled behind the back and tightly handcuffed.
Disguised convoy agents
24/10/2014
Act on physical injuries
SIZO-2, Moscow
hyperaemia, oedema from handcuffs
28/03/2012; 30/03/2012; 01/03/2013; 17/05/2013; 21/05/2013; 10/07/2013; 14/08/2013; 15/08/2013; 20/08/2013; 09/09/2013; 17/09/2013; 20/09/2013.
SIZO-1 Moscow
Several times the applicant refused to go for a walk and was forced to do it by the prison guards. He was dragged with his arms handcuffed behind his back, what caused multiple abrasions and bruises.
Prison guards
18/12/2013
Refusal to initiate criminal investigation
Investigator of Investigation Committee
Abrasion of front chest surface near mastoid, caused by sliding action of the solid blunt object, which did not cause long-lasting health damage. Traces of handcuffs use, with damage to the surface of epidermis. Abrasion of right knee. Pinpoint bruises of left cubital fossa. Pinpoint bruises of left and right shoulders (Not cumulative).
7.
20013/17
Safin v. Russia
16/08/2014 at 22:40
In the flat of his acquaintance, at 58, street Pobedy-73 and in the street
Local police officers of the Department of the Interior of the Republic of Tatarstan
After ill-treatment the applicant was delivered to police office no.9 "Safiullina" UMVD of the Republic of Tatarstan
16/08/2014 around midnight
In the street at the following address: 67 street Richard Zorge, during the pursuit of the applicant
The police officer repeatedly beat the applicant with his feet on the face and body, maintained in handcuffs on the floor, and in the car
Two police officers dressed in civilian clothing
17/08/2014, 18/08/2014, 20/04/2015; 01/06/2015; 07/08/2015; 09/10/2015; 28/07/2016
Medical certificate, forensic medical report no. 1008/28, forensic medical reports during the preliminary inquiry
Republican Clinical hospital, Kazan, Republican forensic expertise office
Bruises on the face (eaves of the right eye and right frontal part), bruises on the left chest, abrasion of the right stifle joint
No
Application No.
and Title
APPENDIX No. 2
Article 3 - Procedural aspect
DOMESTIC COMPLAINT AND THE GOVERNMENT REACTION
Date of Complaint
Authority
Type of Reaction
Date(s)
Procedural Outcome
1.
19147/08
Lavrentyev v. Russia
06/07/2016
Prosecutor’s office of the Kochubeyevsk District of the Stavropol Region
Consistently refused
07/07/2016
The authorities, recognizing existence of injuries, failed to suggest any plausible explanation of their causes and refused to initiate criminal proceedings against police officers. Refusals were quashed by the authorities at least 16 times. Last refusal was upheld by the Kochubeyevskiy District Court of the Stavropol Region on 15/01/2010.
It seems that investigation was carried out without due diligence, no explanation as for the nature and mechanism of injuries suggested.
2.
16608/10
Rakhmanov v. Russia
2/06/2009
Police Office
Consistently refused
24/06/2009,
01/07/2009,
22/03/2013,
22/03/2014.
Complaint under Article 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was dismissed on 23/10/2009 on cassation bv the Nizhegorodskiy Regional Court. The applicant received a compensation for non-pecuniary damage for ineffective investigation (RUB 10 000, around 150 euro) on 09/07/2015 (Nizhegorodskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod).
The following alleged defects in the inquiry: no proper forensic expertise, no cross-examinations of witnesses, no examination of OMON officers, failure quickly to launch criminal investigation (delay of some 3 years and 10 months) were acknowledged in domestic award on 09/07/2015.
3.
37356/10
Milchakov v. Russia
31/03/2009
unclear
unclear
unclear
Investigation Unit of Leninskiy District OVD of Samara;
Kuybyshevskiy Interdistrict Investigation unit of Samara
Zheleznodorozhny District Court
Samara Regional Court
Consistently refused
31/03/2009
15/06/2009
29/07/2009
30/09/2009
Refusal to open criminal investigation. Appeal under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code dismissed.
4.
40010/10
Pasynkov v. Russia
20/09/2009
unclear
Investigation Committee
Courts
Consistently refused
07/05/2009; 28/05/2009; 2/11/2009; 25/01/2010; 12/11/2010; 09/08/2010; 19/08/2011;
06/05/2011; 09/08/2011; 11/12/2011.
7 refusals to open criminal investigation in courts (Leninskiy District Court and Supreme Court of Udmurtiya) dismissed the applicant’s claim.
5.
58843/10
Chirlin v. Russia
15/07/2009
Prosecutor’s Office of Tolyatti
Consistently refused
05/04/2010
The Investigative Committee several times refused to open investigation. The applicant challenged refusal in the national court, but to no avail (Decision of the Komsomolsky District Court of Tolyatti of 29/01/2010), as the decision to refuse to open an investigation was quashed by the investigator just before the hearing. The Investigator again refused to open an investigation on 05/04/2010. This decision was quashed by the prosecutor on 17/02/2011. The decision to refuse to open an investigation was many times quashed. Challenging the decision in court did not bring any results. No due examination of the applicant’s complaints.
6.
62846/13
Belkin v. Russia
10/09/2013
Investigation Committee (SK)
Consistently refused
18/12/2013
The preliminary investigation came to conclusion, that the use of physical power was proven, but found necessary and lawful, thus no criminal investigation was opened.
12/11/2014
Investigation Committee (SK)
Consistently refused
Last decision: 15/04/15 Appeal Moscow City Court
The applicant’s claim under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code was not granted.
Appeal, Moscow City Court
Consistently refused
01/10/2014
The appeal court supported the 1st instance court decision to dismiss the applicant’s claim under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
7.
20013/17
Safin v. Russia
27/08/2014
The Investigation Division of the Investigation Committee of the Republic of Tatarstan
Criminal Investigation
04/02/2015;
05/10/2016
On 5/10/2016 the criminal investigation was closed. Refusal under Article 125 –
On 3/11/2016 Sovetskiy District Court of Kazan, upheld on appeal on 23/12/2016 Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan.
According to the authorities the criminal proceedings were closed due to the absence of a crime; the police offices did not abuse their powers, as “the applicant did not receive significant injuries”
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy