CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 4 mai 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s79DE5897 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:17.85pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.85pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s34D46E87 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sF7A86111 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; font-size:10pt } .sBB355983 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s583D00FA { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:17pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt } .s26FF04E7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:17.3pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sD5195560 { margin-top:36pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-14.2pt; text-align:left } .sA456029A { width:14.2pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sE8EAB139 { width:196.75pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s24238E10 { width:232.12pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sCC22C24E { font-family:Arial; color:#3e3e3e } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .sC6084E76 { width:4.18%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s256F5E63 { width:13.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s28E877B2 { width:10.82%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD15BEF76 { width:9.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s7FDD75C9 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; letter-spacing:-0.2pt; color:#474747 } .s382DCD86 { width:11.34%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s16567A23 { width:7.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s22723641 { width:17.52%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDA214527 { width:14.28%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .s3F9ED75A { width:4.18%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sBCD45BF3 { width:13.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s287CEBC2 { width:10.82%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE0EE531F { width:9.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC7364FC0 { width:11.34%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s70E94D06 { width:7.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s80CAFDAB { width:17.52%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s758FB1BC { width:14.28%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s95A44627 { height:63.4pt } .s3A3C6A58 { height:2.1pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }         THIRD SECTION       CASE OF BIRYUKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Application no. 36006/11 and 8 others - see appended list )             JUDGMENT         STRASBOURG   4 May 2017       This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Biryukov and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Luis López Guerra, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Branko Lubarda, judges, and Karen Reid, Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 30 March 2017, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.     The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table. 2.     The applications were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”). THE FACTS 3.     The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 4.     The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention. THE LAW I.     JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5.     Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. II.   ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   3 OF THE CONVENTION 6.     The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article 3 “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” 7.     The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case ‑ law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Kud ła   v.   Poland [GC], no.   30210/96, §§   90 ‑ 94, ECHR 2000 ‑ XI, and Ananyev and Others v.   Russia , nos.   42525/07 and   60800/08, §§   139 ‑ 65, 10   January 2012). It reiterates in particular that extreme lack of space in a prison cell or overcrowding weighs heavily as an aspect to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the impugned detention conditions were “degrading” from the point of view of Article   3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many authorities, Karalevičius v.   Lithuania , no.   53254/99, §§   36–40, 7 April 2005). 8.     In the leading case of Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28   November 2013, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 9.     Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention were inadequate. 10.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention. III.     REMAINING COMPLAINTS 11.     In applications nos.   36006/11, 37211/11, 53965/12, 53969/12, 55356/12 and 74792/12, the applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, in accordance with the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article   35   §   3   (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Sergey Babushkin case (cited above, §§ 38-45). IV.     APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 12.     Article   41 of the Convention provides: “If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.” 13.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession, to its case ‑ law and the long delay for some of the applicants in filing the application, the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. 14.     The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, 1.     Decides to join the applications;   2.     Declares the applications admissible;   3.     Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article   3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;   4.     Holds that there has been a violation as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);   5.     Holds (a)     that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement; (b)     that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Done in English, and notified in writing on 4 May 2017, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.   Karen Reid   Luis López Guerra Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant name Date of birth   Representative name and location Facility Start and end date Duration Sq. m. per inmate   Specific grievances Other complaints under well ‑ established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     36006/11 12/05/2011 Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Biryukov 18/01/1977     IK-5 Republic of Mordovia 13/03/2009 pending More than 8 year(s) and 18 day(s)   1.3 m²     No hot water, 4-6 sinks for more than 100 inmates, toilet (holes dug out in the ground) is a separately standing facility, same temperature inside it as outside, low quality of clothes, footgear, coverings, tuberculosis-infected inmates in the dormitory, poor sanitary conditions, rodents, insects, poor quality of food and running water, no ventilation, no access to natural light.   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 22,800     37211/11 04/04/2011 (4 applicants) Rizvan Magomedovich Akhmedov 12/10/1983 Vladimir Nikolayevich Kachayev 01/09/1974 Aram Kamoyevich Gekchan 12/09/1987 Vitaliy Viktorovich Rodin   Maryin Sergey Trofimovich Saransk IK-7 Republic of Mordovia 04/04/2011 pending More than 5 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 27 day(s)   2 m²     One hour of daily outdoor exercises, poor sanitary conditions, poor lighting, high humidity and mould, insects, no drinking water, tuberculosis and hepatitis-infected inmates in the cell   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 20,000     53965/12 26/06/2012 Sergey Mikhaylovich Kolesnikov 27/07/1981     IK-29 Kirov Region 15/09/2010 pending More than 6 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 16 day(s)   1.5 m²     Tuberculosis-infected inmates in the dormitory. Toilet outside, with no heating, stench, poor quality of food and running water.   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 19,500     53969/12 07/07/2012 Sergey Nikolayevich Ivanov 17/04/1977     IK-29 Kirov Region 15/08/2009 to 22/08/2013 4 year(s) and 8 day(s)   1.8 m²     Tuberculosis-infected inmates in the dormitory. Toilet outside, with no heating, stench, insects. Poor quality of food and running water.   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 8,500     55356/12 25/07/2012 Dmitriy Anatolyevich Shatalov 24/05/1973     IK-18 Novosibirsk 24/06/2010 to 24/04/2014 3 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 1 day(s)   1.3 m²     Fewer sleeping places than inmates, 6-7 sinks and 5-6 pans for 140-165 inmates, no hot water, no curtains to separate the lavatory.   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 10,300     74792/12 02/11/2012 Vladimir Valeryevich Partionov 16/08/1973 Gordeyeva Margarita Vladimirovna Astrakhan IK-1 Rostov Region 15/11/2010 pending More than 6 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 16 day(s)   1.7 m²     Fewer sleeping places than inmates, sleeping in turns. 5 pans and 5 sinks for 137-152 inmates, no privacy when using lavatory, poor quality of food.   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 18,300     76153/12 10/10/2012 Aleksey Nikolayevich Uzilov 17/09/1976     IK-18 Kharp Yamalo-Nenetskiy Autonomous Region 10/08/2012 to 10/09/2012 1 month(s) and 1 day(s)   IK-18 Kharp Yamalo-Nenetskiy Autonomous Region 22/10/2012 to 18/11/2012 28 day(s)   3.2 m²               3.2 m²     No space to move in the cell, 4.5 sq. m. of space for three inmates for outdoor exercise, sub-zero temperature in winter time. The lavatory pan is next to the bed, no partition.     No space to move in the cell, 4.5 sq. m. of space for three inmates for outdoor exercise, sub-zero temperature in winter time, the lavatory pan is next to the bed, no partition.     1,400     77937/12 04/12/2012 Ivan Yuryevich Tsymbarevich 19/08/1970 Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich Kostroma IK-4 Kostroma Region 15/07/2012 to 15/04/2013 9 month(s) and 1 day(s)   1.9 m²     Cracks in the walls. High humidity, mould on the walls, rodents, insects, poor lighting, no artificial ventilation, poor quality of water, sanitary conditions, tuberculosis-infected inmates in the dormitory, insufficient space for outdoor exercise.     4,300     56384/13 15/08/2013 Konstantin Eduardovich Garifullin 19/06/1974     IK-1 Nizhniy Novgorod Region 27/04/2013 to 12/07/2015 2 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 16 day(s)   1.4 m²     Poor sanitary conditions. 4 pans and 5 sinks for 130 inmates, poor lighting, no ventilation, tuberculosis and hepatitis-infected inmates in the dormitory.     8,800     [1] .     Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.