THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 23545/18
Oleg Aleksandrovich SMETANIN against Russia
and 2 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 24 October 2019 as a Committee composed of:
Alena Poláčková, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Gilberto Felici, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, and the applicants’ replies to these declarations,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is 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”). In some of the applications, complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.
The Government submitted declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications.
The Government acknowledged the use of metal cages in courtrooms. In some of the applications, they further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicants’ rights guaranteed by other provisions of the Convention (see appended table). They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases.
The applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the declarations.
THE LAW
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
The Court finds that, following the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government, the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties.
It therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify the continued examination of the applications.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 14 November 2019.
Liv TigerstedtAlena Poláčková
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
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
Date of birth
Representative’s name and location
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Date of receipt of Government’s declaration
Date of receipt of applicant’s acceptance
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses
per applicant
(in euros)[i]
23545/18
12/05/2018
Oleg Aleksandrovich Smetanin
19/02/1965
Geraskin Eduard Olegovich
Moscow
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - the excessive length of the appellate review of the applicant’s detention orders by the Moscow City Court, with the appellate review proceedings having taken between 30 and 50 days.
14/01/2019
23/03/2019
4,500
29564/18
11/06/2018
Viktor Yuryevich Sverkunov
14/01/1979
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law - to complain about poor conditions of transport;
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transport of the applicant starting on 17/01/2018 between several detention facilities in the Zabaykalskiy Region by an overcrowded van and train and his detention in poor conditions for several days during the transport in transit detention facilities (IZ-1 and IZ-2 of the Zabaykalskiy Region).
29/01/2019
15/03/2019
4,000
32510/18
02/07/2018
Anvar Urazgaleyevich Kaldamanov
28/05/1987
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - Conditions in convoy cells of the Syktyvkar Town Court of the Republic of Komi. Multiple occasions between 26/04/2017 and 06/04/2018. Severe overcrowding;
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law - to complain about poor conditions of transport and placement in a metal cage in court hearings.
29/01/2019
09/04/2019
4,000
[i]. Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy