Communicated on 22 September 2016
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 59356/10
Anatoliy Anatolyevich MINYAYLO
against Ukraine
lodged on 30 September 2010
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr Anatoliy Anatolyevich Minyaylo, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1976 and is currently detained in Lviv.
The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
1. Applicant’s detention and alleged ill-treatment
On the night of 13 February 2005, in the course of a previously prepared operation, the police arrested the applicant and three other people on a train as they carried out a robbery of passengers on board. They were taken to the police station at Mukachevo train station (“the police station”). According to the applicant, he was beaten by the police during his arrest although he showed no resistance to the officers.
On 13 February 2005 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. three police officers further tortured the applicant to make him confess to two robberies committed on 6 December 2004 and 28 January 2005. In particular, he alleged that he was kicked and hit on the head and torso, including the use of a plastic bottle filled with water; his left leg was handcuffed to his right hand; a thick coat was put on his head and he was kicked; he was undressed, pushed onto the floor and kicked in the kidneys more than 70 times; he was also struck on his legs and backside; he was also pulled to his feet while his hands were handcuffed behind his back.
According to the applicant, from 13 to 15 February 2005, he was handcuffed to a radiator and given no food or medical assistance.
On 13 February 2005 criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant and several other people in connection with a series of robberies.
On 14 February 2005 the applicant was admitted to a temporary detention facility (“the ITT”). No bodily injuries were found on him at that time.
On 24 February 2005, while in a pre-trial detention centre (“the SIZO”), he was found to have abrasions on his chin, knee and calves.
On 8 April 2005 the applicant had a forensic medical examination. No signs of injury were found on his body. According to the forensic report, the applicant stated that he had been tortured by the police. Referring to the medical examinations in the ITT and the SIZO, the forensic expert classified the applicant’s injuries as minor and stated that he could no longer establish their precise cause and the date they had been inflicted.
Between 14 and 16 February 2005 an ambulance was called for the applicant on a number of occasions. He was diagnosed with hypertension but the police officers refused to send him to hospital. According to the ambulance medics’ reports, the applicant had no bodily injuries.
In August 2005 the criminal case against the applicant was sent to the Stryi Town Court (“the Stryi Court”) for trial.
On 12 March 2007 the Stryi Court found the applicant guilty on several counts of robbery and sentenced him to nine years’ imprisonment.
On 7 September 2007 the Court of Appeal of Lviv Region (“the Court of Appeal”) quashed the initial judgment and sent the case back to the prosecutor’s office for additional investigation. In doing so, it noted that the applicant’s rights as a defendant had been violated during the pre-trial investigation as he had not been legally represented, contrary to the requirements of domestic law, and no interpreter had been provided for him despite the fact he did not understand Ukrainian. The court further noted that the Stryi Court had failed to question any victims in the case or take any measures to establish their whereabouts.
On 28 November 2007 the Stryi Court received the case file from the prosecutor’s office.
On 17 July 2009 the Stryi Court found the applicant guilty of the charges and sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment.
On 23 December 2009 the Court of Appeal quashed the new judgment and sent the case back to the prosecutor’s office for additional investigation owing to a number of procedural shortcomings.
On an unspecified date the criminal case was sent to the Stryi Court for trial.
On 21 June 2010 the Stryi Court sent the case back to the prosecutor’s office for additional investigation. It pointed out, inter alia, that the prosecutor had failed to comply with the instructions of the Court of Appeal and that some of the evidence against the applicant was inadmissible as it had been gathered in violation of his rights.
The Court has not been informed of the further course of those proceedings.
2. Investigation into allegations of ill-treatment
On an unspecified date the applicant’s father and wife complained to the prosecutor’s office that the applicant had been ill-treated by the police.
On 4 March 2005 the Office of the Prosecutor General informed the applicant’s wife that her complaint concerning illegal acts by the police had been forwarded to the prosecutor’s office of Lviv Region.
On 20 April 2005 the prosecutor’s office of Lviv Region informed the applicant’s wife that following investigations by the prosecutor’s offices of Lviv and Zakarpattya regions as well as by the Lviv transport prosecutor’s office it had been established that during the arrest of the applicant and his accomplices the police officers had had to use physical force to overcome their resistance and to prevent their escape. As a result, light bodily injuries, such as scratches, could have been caused to the applicant by his falling onto the floor of one of the train carriages.
On 16 May 2005 the prosecutor’s office of Lviv Region, referring to the results of those investigations, informed the applicant’s father that the allegations that the applicant had been beaten by the police appeared to be ill-founded.
On 15 November 2007 the prosecutor’s office of Lviv Region refused to institute criminal proceedings against the police officers as no crime appeared to have been committed. By the same decision, the prosecutor refused to institute criminal proceedings against the applicant and his accomplices for resisting the police during their arrest because of the minor nature of the acts in question. The applicant appealed against that decision to the Office of the Prosecutor General.
On 13 December 2007 the Office of the Prosecutor General informed the applicant that the decision of 15 November 2007 and all the relevant files had been joined to the criminal case against him and would be examined by the trial court.
On 11 June 2010 the Office of the Prosecutor General dismissed the applicant’s complaint, referring to the prosecutor’s decision of 15 November 2007.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention of ill‑treatment by the police during his arrest and in police custody and that there was no effective investigation of his complaints.
He further complains that the length of the criminal proceedings against him was excessive.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Was the applicant subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment by the police during his arrest and in police custody, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?
2. Having regard to the procedural protection from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment (see paragraph 131 of Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, ECHR 2000-IV), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?
The Government are requested to submit all the documents relating to the investigation of the applicant’s allegations that he was ill-treated by the police, including his complaints and the domestic judicial decisions. They are also requested to submit an information note in chronological order on the course of the criminal proceedings against the applicant.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy