Published on 19 February 2024
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 46839/17
Sergiy Pavlovych ZINCHENKO against Ukraine
and 4 other applications
(see list appended)
communicated on 30 January 2024
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES
The applications principally concern the applicants’ allegations under Article 3 of the Convention that they were held in a glass cabin on 77 occasions during court hearings, at the Svyatoshynskyy District Court of Kyiv from 12 May 2016 to 4 October 2017 in the course of criminal proceedings into the Maidan events in Kyiv (see Shmorgunov and Others v. Ukraine, nos. 15367/14 and 13 others, 21 January 2021). According to the applicants, the hearing room was equipped with a glass cabin measuring 3.6 m x 1.2 m x 2.2 m (height). During the court hearings the applicants were held in that cabin all together.
The applicant in application no. 74462/17 also raises complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention about the unreasonable length of his detention which lasted from 23 February 2015 to 24 October 2019.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES AS REGARDS ALL THE APPLICATIONS
1. Did the applicants exhaust all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, in respect of their complaint under Article 3 of the Convention? Did the national legal framework, as interpreted and applied by national courts, provide an accused person with a possibility to ask to be allowed to sit outside the glass cabin during the court hearing? If so, did the applicants ask so? Also, was there an effective system in place for examining such request and, if granted, for implementing the decision? The Government are invited to provide relevant examples of domestic case‑law on the matter.
2. Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the applicants’ placement in a glass cabin during the court hearings which were held at the Svyatoshynskyy District Court of Kyiv from 12 May 2016 to 4 October 2017 (see Yaroslav Belousov v. Russia, nos. 2653/13 and 60980/14, §§ 120-28, 4 October 2016)?
The Government are invited to submit information about the relevant regulatory framework governing the use of glass cabins in court rooms. The Government are also invited to submit information about the technical specifications of the glass cabins installed in the courtroom where the hearings in the applicants’ case took place, in particular as regards the cabin’s size and design, as well as access to light and ventilation.
3. Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaint under Article 3, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?
ADDITIONAL QUESTION TO THE PARTIES AS REGARDS APPLICATION NO. 74462/17
Was the length of the applicant’s pre-trial detention in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Case name
Lodged on
Applicant
Year of Birth
Represented by
1.
46839/17
Zinchenko v. Ukraine
23/06/2017
Sergiy
Pavlovych ZINCHENKO
1990
Igor
Vasylyovych VARFOLOMYEYEV
2.
74329/17
Marynchenko v. Ukraine
12/10/2017
Oleksandr Mykolayovych MARYNCHENKO
1986
Oleksandr Oleksandrovych GOROSHYNSKYY
3.
74392/17
Abroskin v. Ukraine
12/10/2017
Pavlo Mykhaylovych ABROSKIN
1989
Oleksandr Oleksandrovych GOROSHYNSKYY
4.
74462/17
Tamtura v. Ukraine
10/10/2017
Sergiy
Borysovych TAMTURA
1989
Igor
Vasylyovych VARFOLOMYEYEV
5.
74775/17
Yanishevskyy v. Ukraine
10/10/2017
Oleg
Viktorovych YANISHEVSKYY
1977
Stefan
Stefanovych RESHKO