THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 36198/16
Eduard Viktorovich PEREKRESTOV against Russia
and 2 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 8 December 2022 as a Committee composed of:
Darian Pavli, President,
Ioannis Ktistakis,
Andreas Zünd, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, 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 and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants and other details of the present applications are set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the use of metal cages in courtrooms were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”). Other complaints raised by the applicants were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
Joinder of the applicationsHaving regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
Complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (use of metal cages in courtrooms)It follows from the Government’s observations that the applicants had been confined before the court not in metal cages, but in glass cabins consisting of steel frames and sheets of bulletproof glass. The Court has previously held that the placement of defendants behind glass partitions or in glass cabins did not in itself involve an element of humiliation sufficient to reach the minimum level of severity, as was the case with metal cages. Such level could be attained, however, if the circumstances of their confinement, taken as a whole, would cause them distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention (see Yaroslav Belousov v. Russia, nos. 2653/13 and 60980/14, §§ 123-28, 4 October 2016, where extreme overcrowding inside the glass cabin led the Court to the conclusion of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention, and Mariya Alekhina and Others v. Russia, no. 38004/12, §§ 144-50, 17 July 2018, where similar conclusion was reached by the Court against the background of the glass dock having been constantly surrounded by armed police officers and court ushers and a guard dog having been present next to it in the courtroom).
The Court observes that in the present cases the applicants did not put forward any particular circumstances of their confinement inside the glass cabins which would allow the Court to establish whether the conditions in the courtrooms attained the minimum level of severity and amounted to degrading treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
Remaining complaintsThe applicants also raised complaints under Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention about the impact of their confinement in glass cabins on the fairness of the proceedings against them and under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention about their detention in the absence of “relevant and sufficient” reasons. Applicants in applications nos. 40617/16 and 42050/16 further complained under Article 13 in connection with their complaints under Articles 3 and 6 § 3 (c).
The Court has examined these complaints and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 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 12 January 2023.
{signature_p_1} {signature_p_2}
Viktoriya Maradudina Darian Pavli
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
(use of metal cages in courtrooms)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Name of the court
Date of the relevant judgment
36198/16
08/06/2016
Eduard Viktorovich PEREKRESTOV
1968
Kiryanov Aleksandr Vladimirovich
Taganrog
Taganrog Town Court of
the Rostov Region
27/07/2016
40617/16
23/06/2016
Artem Aleksandrovich KORYUNOV
1990
Kiryanov Aleksandr Vladimirovich
Taganrog
Kirovskiy District Court of
Rostov-on-Don
13/05/2016
42050/16
12/07/2016
Roman Nikolayevich MAKAROV
1973
Reyzvig
Arnold Anatolyevich
Taganrog
Taganrog Town Court of
the Rostov Region
18/08/2016