Published on 15 April 2024
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 1893/19
Sergey Aleksandrovich SHAKHMAN against Russia
and 2 other applications
(see list appended)
PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 21 March 2024, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the applications should be given to the Government of Russia.
In the applications marked by an asterisk, other complaints were raised. This part of the applications has been struck out of the Court’s list of cases or declared inadmissible by the Court, sitting in a single-judge formation, assisted by a rapporteur as provided for in Article 24 § 2 of the Convention.
In the enclosed list of applications, whenever an applicant is referred to using initials, this indicates that the Court has authorised anonymity for that person, whose identity will not be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4).
For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website.
SUBJECT MATTER
The applications concern complaints raised under Article 3 of the Convention relating to use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts) and Vorontsov and Others v. Russia, nos. 59655/14 and 2 others, 31 January 2017).
APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS
List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
(use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements 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
Start date
End date
Other complaints under well-established case-law
1893/19*
29/12/2018
Sergey Aleksandrovich SHAKHMAN
1973
Aleksey Nikolayevich Laptev
Moscow
Savelovskiy District Court of Moscow, Moscow City Court
06/10/2016
30/07/2018
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of placement in a metal cage during court hearings
51431/21*
27/12/2021
Vladislav Viktorovich SADKOV
1993
Ust-Katav Town Court of the Chelyabinsk Region, Tosno Town Court of the Leningrad Region
24/08/2019
16/12/2021
Art. 8 (1) - permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities - Multiple periods of detention between 23/08/2019 and 17/12/2021; IVS (temporary detention ward) in Ust-Katav, Chelyabinsk Region, and Tosno, Leningrad Region - detention in different cells with video surveillance, video surveillance in a lavatory and/or shower room, opposite-sex operators,
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of placement in a metal cage during court hearings and
in respect of permanent video surveillance in detention facilities.
53123/21*
29/11/2021
Nikita Sergeyevich PARFENOV
1997
Pervomayskiy District Court of Kirov
08/06/2021
24/02/2021
08/06/2021
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of placement in a metal cage during court hearings.