Published on 20 November 2023
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 23906/15
Kristina Yuryevna ODARENKO
against Ukraine
lodged on 6 May 2015
communicated on 30 October 2023
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the applicant’s allegations under Article 3 and Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that she was ill-treated by officers of the Khmelnytskyy Town police, that her complaints in that regard were not effectively investigated and that the self-incriminating statements she gave as a result of the ill-treatment were used for her criminal conviction. In particular, following the applicant’s arrest on 11 August 2013, the police allegedly beat her and deprived her of sleep and food with the aim of extracting her confession of having committed an aggravated murder on 1 August 2013. The injuries recorded in a forensic medical report of 13 August 2013 – mostly numerous hematomas on her body, face and limbs – were allegedly caused to her by the police. During an investigative experiment on that date, conducted before the applicant’s medical examination and in the presence of a lawyer appointed to her by the authorities, the applicant made self-incriminating statements, which were eventually replied upon by the courts convicting her of that crime and sentencing her to life imprisonment. The final decision was adopted by the Higher Specialised Court of Civil and Criminal Matters on 26 April 2016. In the court’s decisions convicting the applicant it was noted that although she had retracted her self-incriminating statements during the trial, the allegations of her ill-treatment by the police, which had been raised on 27 August 2013, had been duly examined by the Khmelnytskyy Regional Prosecutor’s Office that on 22 April 2014 had dismissed them as unsubstantiated relying mainly on the statements of the police officers concerned. The applicant’s appeals against the prosecutors’ decision were rejected by the courts of two judicial instances on 12 and 25 November 2014, which found no fault in how the prosecutors investigated the matter.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Was the applicant subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, having regard to her allegations of ill-treatment by the police on between 11 and 13 August 2013?
2. Have the domestic authorities conducted an effective official investigation into the applicant’s alleged ill-treatment, as required by Article 3 of the Convention (see, for both questions, Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, §§ 81-90 and 114‑23, ECHR 2015; Teslenko v. Ukraine, no. 55528/08, §§ 87-90 and 106-18, 20 December 2011; Kaverzin v. Ukraine, no. 23893/03, §§ 173-80, 15 May 2012; and Sadkov v. Ukraine, no. 21987/05, §§ 91-101, 6 July 2017)?
3. Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against her, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was the fairness of her trial undermined by the admission as evidence of her statements allegedly obtained in breach of her rights under Article 3 of the Convention (see, for example, Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, § 166, ECHR 2010; Zamferesko v. Ukraine, no. 30075/06, §§ 70-72, 15 November 2012; and Zyakun v. Ukraine, no. 34006/06, §§ 62-64, 25 February 2016)?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy