Communicated on 30 January 2020
Published on 17 February 2020
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 2634/17
Ivan Aleksandrovich MOROZOV against Russia
and 14 other applications
(see list appended)
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES
The cases concern the application of handcuffs to prisoners in prisons and during their transfers. The applicants were convicted of different crimes. Some of the applicants serve their sentences in special prisons for lifers and they have to wear handcuffs every time they leave their cells allegedly without any legal ground (see Kashavelov v. Bulgaria, no. 891/05, §§ 39 and 40, 20 January 2011, and Kaverzin v. Ukraine, no. 23893/03, §§ 151 63, 15 May 2012).
The applicants also complain about poor conditions of detention and transport (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, 10 January 2012, and Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, 9 April 2019), forced shaving (see Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, §§ 99-122, ECHR 2003 XII (extracts)), video surveillance in cells (see Gorlov and Others v. Russia, nos. 27057/06 and 2 others, §§ 58‑100, 2 July 2019), segregation on account of the life prisoner status (see Harakchiev and Tolumov v. Bulgaria, nos. 15018/11 and 61199/12, §§ 179-214, ECHR 2014 (extracts)), detention in a cage at court hearings (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, §§ 77-139, ECHR 2014 (extracts)) and lack of effective remedies to protect their rights.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Questions on prison regime:
(a) Did the application of handcuffs to applicants (in all cases), using dogs to guard the applicants during their transportation (applications nos. 6725/18, 15031/18, 34068/19), separation of the life convicts from other prison population and their solitary confinement or placement in a cell holding no more than two persons (applications nos. 71295/17, 78210/17, 79064/17, 15031/18, 15294/18), forced shaving (applications nos. 71295/17, 78210/17, 79064/17, 15294/18, 21401/18, 44351/18), constitute inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention (see Yankov v. Bulgaria, no. 39084/97, §§ 99-122, ECHR 2003 XII (extracts); Kashavelov v. Bulgaria, no. 891/05, §§ 39-40, 20 January 2011; Kaverzin v. Ukraine, no. 23893/03, §§ 151-63, 15 May 2012; Harakchiev and Tolumov v. Bulgaria, nos. 15018/11 and 61199/12, §§ 179-214, ECHR 2014 (extracts))? What were the reasons and legal grounds for applying the above measures to the applicants? The Government are invited to indicate periods when the applicants were subjected to the above measures and to provide supporting documents relating to application of these measures.
What were the legal grounds for attaching the applicants to a wire rope together with several other prisoners during their transfer (applications nos. 34068/19 and 38336/19)?
In case of life prisoners, did the above measures apply automatically to all life prisoners?
(b) As regards the applications nos. 78210/17, 15031/18, 15294/18, 34068/19, and 38336/19, did the applicants have effective domestic remedies in respect of the above complaints, as guaranteed by Article 13 of the Convention?
The Government are invited to provide examples of domestic case-law relating to the above measures in respect of life prisoners to illustrate the practical effectiveness of the existing remedies, if any.
2. Conditions of detention and transport and detention in cage:
(a) As regards the applications nos. 2634/17, 71295/17, 78210/17, 79064/17, 6725/18, 15031/18, 15294/18, 21401/18, 29086/18, 44351/18, 15943/19, 30453/19, and 38336/19, were the conditions of the applicants’ detention and transport compatible with Article 3 of the Convention (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 120-66, 10 January 2012; Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, §§ 46-58, 28 November 2013; Gorbulya v. Russia, no. 31535/09, §§ 64-81, 92-98, 6 March 2014; Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, 9 April 2019)?
(b) As regards the applications nos. 71295/17, 78210/17, 79064/17, 15031/18, 15294/18, and 38336/19, did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for the complaint about conditions of detention under Article 3, as required by Article 13 of the Convention (see Ananyev and Others, cited above, §§ 93-119, and Sergey Babushkin, cited above, §§ 36-45)?
(c) As regards the applications nos. 2634/17 and 15943/19, were the applicants subjected to degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of their confinement in a metal cage in the courtrooms (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev, nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, §§ 113-39, ECHR 2014 (extracts), and Vorontsov and Others v. Russia, nos. 59655/14 and 2 others, § 31, 31 January 2017)?
3. Video surveillance in prison:
As regards the applications nos. 2634/17 and 15294/18, were the applicants subjected to constant video surveillance during their detention in prisons? If so, did that measure constitute an interference with their private life? If so, was it justified under Article 8 § 2 of the Convention (see Gorlov and Others v. Russia, nos. 27057/06 and 2 others, 2 July 2019)? In particular:
Was the interference “prescribed by law”?
If so, did it pursue one or more of the legitimate aims referred to in Article 8 § 2 of the Convention?
If so, was it “necessary in a democratic society” to achieve those aims? In particular, could those aims have been achieved by using less intrusive means?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Case name
Lodged on
Applicant
Date of Birth
Place of Residence
Nationality
1
2634/17
Morozov
v. Russia
13/12/2016
Ivan Aleksandrovich MOROZOV
27/02/1984
Kharp
Russian
2
71295/17
Chudinov
v. Russia
04/09/2017
Eduard Vladimirovich CHUDINOV
31/01/1969
Elban
Russian
3
78210/17
Kalinin
v. Russia
10/10/2017
Roman Sergeyevich KALININ
05/07/1984
Chita
Russian
4
79064/17
Ibragimov
v. Russia
08/11/2017
Umrbek Durdiyevich IBRAGIMOV
08/05/1992
Elban
Ouzbekistan
5
6725/18
Ivanov
v. Russia
09/01/2018
Aleksey Yevgenyevich IVANOV
04/03/1976
Elban
Russian
6
15031/18
Resin
v. Russia
09/03/2018
Andrey Igorevich RESIN
29/07/1974
Khabarovsk
Russian
7
15294/18
Tikhomirov
v. Russia
03/03/2018
Ilya Yuryevich TIKHOMIROV
26/07/1986
Elban
Russian
8
21401/18
Shatalov
v. Russia
09/04/2018
Aleksey Sergeyevich SHATALOV
18/03/1983
Elban
Russian
9
29086/18
Semin
v. Russia
06/06/2018
Dmitriy Borisovich SEMIN
27/11/1970
Elban
Russian
10
40436/18
Kuchmenov
v. Russia
06/08/2018
Aslan Bashirovich KUCHMENOV
19/02/1980
Elban
Russian
11
44351/18
Rudykh and Semin
v. Russia
30/08/2018
Vladimir Anatolyevich RUDYKH
01/10/1970
Elban
Russian
Dmitriy Borisovich SEMIN
27/11/1970
Elban
Russian
12
15943/19
Shakhnova
v. Russia
21/02/2019
Yuliya Gennadyevna SHAKHNOVA
11/07/1972
Moscow
Russian
13
30453/19
Shashkov
v. Russia
07/05/2019
Roman Mikhaylovich SHASHKOV
26/07/1963
Solikamsk
Russian
14
34068/19
Skibenko
v. Russia
17/06/2019
Aleksey Gennadyevich SKIBENKO
23/04/1978
Aleksandriyskaya
Russian
15
38336/19
Lunev
v. Russia
02/07/2019
Vladislav Vitalyevich LUNEV
26/08/1981
Stavropol
Russian
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy