CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 15 février 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s58699FB5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s29A3AC47 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s37072F3C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.85pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9A177BD5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17.85pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7A3BE577 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:16.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.51pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s88DC4A4D { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:14pt } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s74818F78 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-family:Arial; list-style-position:inside } .sE7B3A78A { width:1.99pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sC60B69EF { width:127.74pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; 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 } .s3695F815 { 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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .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 } .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 }   FOURTH SECTION CASE OF RUDIK AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 13050/17 and 10 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 15 February 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Rudik and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Branko Lubarda , President ,   Armen Harutyunyan,   Ana Maria Guerra Martins , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 25 January 2024, 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 Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications. 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 detention under strict imprisonment regime. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention. THE LAW 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. Jurisdiction 6.     The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§   68 ‑ 73, 17 January 2023). ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 of the Convention 7.     The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 3 of the Convention. 8.     In the leading case of N.T. v. Russia, no. 14727/11, 2 June 2020, 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 strict imprisonment regime applied to the applicants as life prisoners has been incompatible with the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the severe and excessive statutory measures inherent in that regime, aggravated by routine handcuffing. 10.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   3 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 11.     Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given 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 Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC] (nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts)), Gorlov and Others v. Russia (nos. 27057/06 and 2   others, 2 July 2019), and Sergey Babushkin v. Russia (no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013). APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 12.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, N.T. , cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16   September 2022; Declares the applications admissible; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table); 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 15 February 2024, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.   Viktoriya Maradudina   Branko Lubarda   Acting Deputy Registrar   President     APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention under strict imprisonment regime) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Facility Start and end date of detention under strict regime Other complaints under   well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     13050/17 25/01/2017   Leonid Valeryevich RUDIK 1987       IK-18 Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Region, IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region 4/10/2011 – pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court   3,000     75839/17 17/10/2017 Maksim Viktorovich KISELEV 1981     IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region, IK-6 Khabarovsk Region 25/11/2009 - pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court   3,000     45978/18 06/09/2018 Andrey Sergeyevich GADZHIYEV 1978     IK-6 Khabarovsk Region 24/01/2013 strict regime in a prison 28/07/2015 general regime in a prison 09/06/2018 general regime in a colony 23/04/2019 strict regime in a colony – pending             Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention after conviction - in UK-288/T Krasnoyarsk Region from 03/03/2014 till 14/05/2018 - lack of fresh air, poor quality of food, lack of privacy for toilet, infestation of cell with insects/rodents 5,000     46497/18 07/09/2018 Anatoliy Anatolyevich BERESTNEV 1961     IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region, IK-6 Khabarovsk Region 26/06/2010-16/10/2017 17/10/2017 - pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention and in respect of permanent video surveillance in detention facility,   Art. 8 (1) - permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities - detention in different cells with video surveillance at IK-6 in Khabarovsk Region since 17/10/2017 - pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court 4,000     43919/20 13/09/2020 Igor Valeryevich DVINYANIN 1978     IK-2 Perm Region 30/01/2017 - pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court   3,000     26270/21 30/04/2021 Aleksey Mikhaylovich VOYEVODIN 1984     IK-18 Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Region 24/04/2012 - 16/08/2021   3,000     50383/21 24/09/2021 Abdugani Sharifovich GANIYEV 1991     IK-2 Perm Region 03/12/2013 - pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court   3,000     22546/22 21/03/2022 Mikhail Anatolyevich TETERIN 1979     IK-2 Perm Region 16/09/2015 - pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - on 13/02/2022, in the Perm Regional Court, by video link from IK-2 Perm Region 5,000     29932/22 11/05/2022 Roman Vladimirovich ALTUKHOV 1978     IK-2 Perm Region 14/12/2004 – pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - hearing on 14/01/2022 in the Perm Regional Court 5,000   34851/22 30/06/2022 Andrey Vladimirovich LITVINTSEV 1971 Yesina Tatyana Robertovna Sevastopol IK-6 Khabarovsk Region 17/12/2013 – pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court   3,000   36524/22 30/06/2022 Mikhail Sergeyevich ZAKHARIN 1979 Brsoyan Slavik Astribekovich Moscow IK-18 Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Region 29/01/2008 - pending on the date when the application was lodged with the Court   3,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.