THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 44253/08
Oleg Olegovich TETERIN against Russia
and 11 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 1 July 2021 as a Committee composed of:
Darian Pavli, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Peeter Roosma, 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 is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention 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 LAWJoinder of the applications
Having 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 5 § 3 of the Convention (excessive length of pre-trial detention)
The applicants complained that their pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long. They relied on Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, which read as follows:
Article 5 § 3
“3. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 (c) of this Article shall be ... entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial.”
The Court observes that the general principles regarding the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, have been stated in a number of its previous judgments (see, among many other authorities, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI, and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, §§ 41-44, ECHR 2006-X, with further references). In the present applications, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for excessive length of pre-trial detention.
The Court notes that while extending the applicants’ detention the domestic courts had relied on the existence of a reasonable suspicion of their involvement in aggravated and/or violent offences, the vulnerability of the victims, the complexity of the criminal cases against the applicants and the existence of a serious risk of their absconding or interfering with justice, confirmed, inter alia, by the pattern of their behaviour, organised nature of the crimes, extensive connection to the criminal underworld and/or substantial financial resources and previous documented attempts to tamper with witnesses or victims. The Court is satisfied that the domestic courts cited specific facts in support of their conclusions that the applicants were liable to obstruct justice, to re-offend or abscond. They also considered a possibility of applying alternative measures to those applicants but found them to be inadequate. The domestic courts duly examined all the pertinent factors and gave “relevant” and “sufficient” reasons to justify the applicant’s continued detention. The Court also finds that the domestic authorities displayed “special diligence” in the conduct of the proceedings (see, for example, Khloyev v. Russia, no. 46404/13, §§ 96-107, 5 February 2015; Topekhin v. Russia, no. 78774/13, 10 May 2016; Sopin v. Russia, no. 57319/10, 18 December 2012; and Isayev v. Russia, no. 20756/04, 22 October 2009).
In view of the above, the Court finds that the applicants’ complaint is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.Remaining complaints
In applications nos. 44253/08, 32442/17 and 11365/18 the applicants also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.
The Court has examined the applications listed in the appended table 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 22 July 2021.
{signature_p_2}
Viktoriya MaradudinaDarian Pavli
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention
(excessive length of pre-trial detention)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Period of detention
Court which issued detention order / examined appeal
Length of detention
44253/08
07/08/2008
Oleg Olegovich TETERIN
1975
Davidyan Eleonora
Moscow
15/03/2008 to
11/06/2008
Savelovskiy Ditrict Court, Moscow City Court
2 month(s) and 28 day(s)
43753/16
26/12/2016
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich BITSADZE
1983
16/09/2015 to
26/09/2016
Syktyvkar Town Court of the Komi Republic
1 year(s) and 11 day(s)
32442/17
11/10/2017
Pavel Nikolayevich GRISHANIN
1971
Zakharenko Igor Nikolayevich
Syktyvkar
05/11/2015 to
06/02/2019
Syktyvkar Town Court of the Komi Republic
3 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 2 day(s)
8815/18
01/02/2018
Andrey Ildarovich GILVANOV
1990
Alekseyenko Dmitriy Andreyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
22/03/2017 to
03/08/2018
Moscow District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod (1st instance); Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
1 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 13 day(s)
9753/18
13/02/2018
Vadim Vladimirovich BARINOV
1979
Sukhoveyev Andrey Borisovich
Kemerovo
11/02/2016 to
09/09/2019
Tsentralnyy District Court of Kemerovo; Kemerovo Regional Court
3 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 30 day(s)
11365/18
15/02/2018
Vyacheslav Robertovich SHATROVSKIY
1969
Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
05/11/2017 to
24/05/2018
Tverskoy District Court of Moscow; Moscow City Court
6 month(s) and 20 day(s)
13591/18
06/03/2018
Konstantin Mikhaylovich TEPLYAKOV
1982
Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
03/12/2016 to
06/09/2017
Lefortovskiy District Court of Moscow; Moscow City Court
9 month(s) and 4 day(s)
17065/18
01/04/2018
Islam Izrailovich NALGIYEV
1962
Geroyev Akhmed Daudovich
Moscow
14/06/2016 to
19/04/2019
Presnenskiy District Court of Moscow (1st instance); Moscow City Court (1st instance, appeal instance)
2 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 6 day(s)
23811/18
11/05/2018
Roman Viktorovich BORODIN
1977
08/11/2017 to
29/08/2018
Mineralnyye Vody Town Court; Predgornyy District Court of Stavropol; Stavropol Regional Court
9 month(s) and 22 day(s)
56047/18
22/11/2018
Aleksandr Vadimovich BAKHTIN
1963
Yevmenova Yelena Vladimirovna
Krasnoyarsk
09/05/2018 to
31/07/2018
Zheleznodorozhnyy District Court of Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
2 month(s) and 23 day(s)
8012/19
28/01/2019
Maksim Andreyevich ABROSIMOV
1992
23/11/2018 to
05/04/2019
Tsentralnyy District Court of Volgograd; Volgograd Regional Court
4 month(s) and 14 day(s)
8528/19
11/01/2019
Azat Ildusovich YARULLIN
1977
10/07/2018 to
07/02/2019
Naberezhnyye Chelny Town Court of the Republic of Tatarstan; Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan
6 month(s) and 29 day(s)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy