CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 septembre 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s25B97BCD { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border:0.75pt solid #808080; border-collapse:collapse } .sF5C9E8B1 { height:46.3pt } .sD1CDDC62 { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s2490CDBC { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s26ADB50A { border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sFD306575 { height:35.55pt } .s2F4AF114 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s89700CF5 { margin-left:33.01pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:2.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold } .s898DAE93 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2637CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .sB71F2881 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sBCA334AF { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7CB6920E { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s62945D10 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   Communicated on 19 September 2016   THIRD SECTION Applications nos 62798/09 and 33184/11 Artur Germanovich IVANOV against Russia and Aleksey Vsevolodovich GAVRILOV against Russia lodged on 6 November 2009 and 1 April 2011 respectively STATEMENT OF FACTS 1.     The applicants are Russian nationals. Their personal details are listed in the Appendix. 2.     The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. A.     Mr Ivanov 3.     The facts of the applicant’s ill-treatment in police custody were established in the judgment of the Novocheboksarsk Town Court of the Chuvash Republic of 22 August 2008, upheld on 11 November 2008 by the Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic, and are as follows. 4.     On 10 April 2007 the applicant was assaulted on a street near his home by several people, one of whom was officer M. The applicant was then taken to district police station no. 1 of Novocheboksarsk ( участковый пункт милиции № 1 г. Новочебоксарска ) for the purpose of checking his identity. Officer M. threatened the applicant with opening a criminal case against him in relation to disorderly conduct, hit him against a wall several times, and punched him in his left ear. 5.     The applicant had a traumatic rupture of the left eardrum with a haemorrhage, which qualified as “insignificant health damage”. 6.     Officer M. was convicted under Article 286 § 3 of the Criminal Code (abuse of powers) and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment and a two ‑ year ban on exercising official power. 7.     In 2009, in connection with his ill-treatment by the police officer, the applicant brought a civil claim against the Ministry of Finance of the Chuvash Republic for non-pecuniary damages in the amount of 312,487   Russian roubles (RUB). 8.     On 6 April 2009 the Novocheboksarsk Town Court of the Chuvash Republic allowed the applicant’s civil claim in part and awarded him RUB   20,000 in non-pecuniary damages. 9.     On 6 May 2009 the Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic upheld the judgment on appeal, noting that the Court’s case-law did not prejudge the national courts’ assessment of the applicant’s case, and that the determination of the amount of non-pecuniary damages was within the national courts’ margin of appreciation. B.     Mr Gavrilov 10.     The facts of the applicant’s ill-treatment in police custody were established in the judgment of the Adlerskiy District Court of Sochi of the Krasnodar Region of 27   March   2009, which became enforceable on 3   June 2009, and are as follows. 11.     On 9 February 2006 the applicant was arrested by police officers of the Adlerskiy district police department of Sochi on suspicion of theft. He was unlawfully detained until 14 February 2006 and subjected to ill ‑ treatment, comprising punching and kicking, being hit on the head with the door of a bookcase, having his hands tied together and a plastic bag put over his head to cut off his access to air, and being given electric shocks, in order to make him sign his “statements of surrender and confession”. 12.     The applicant sustained the following injuries: (i) a concomitant blunt injury of his head, chest and cervical spine; (ii) a contusion of his right eye; (iii) a bruise on the back of his right ear; (iv) barotrauma of both his ears in the form of “acute inflammation of the ears on both sides”, concussion, a contusion on the right side of his chest, and a contusion on his cervical spine; and (v) multiple abrasions and bruises on his limbs. The injuries were qualified as “insignificant health damage”. The applicant also experienced post-traumatic stress disorder, related to the events of   9 ‑ 14   February   2006, which caused him “medium health damage”. 13.     Police officers S.O., Kh., S.S., and Sh. were convicted under Article   286 § 3 of the Criminal Code (abuse of power) and sentenced to different terms of imprisonment ranging from three to six months to four years, and to bans on exercising official power ranging from two to three years. 14.     In 2010 the applicant brought a civil claim against the Russian Ministry of Finance for non-pecuniary damages in the amount of RUB   5,000,000, in connection with the fact that he had been unlawfully deprived of his liberty and ill-treated in police custody. 15.     On 17 September 2010 the Mostovskiy District Court of the Krasnodar Region allowed the applicant’s civil claim in part and awarded him RUB   500,000 in non-pecuniary damages, on account of his unlawful detention and torture.   On 11 November 2010 the Krasnodar Regional Court reduced the amount of compensation to RUB 200,000. COMPLAINTS The applicants complain under Article 3 of the Convention that they were ill-treated by the police, and that the compensation awarded to them was inadequate. Mr Ivanov also complains under Article 13 of the Convention that there is no effective domestic remedy for his complaint.   QUESTIONS 1.     Have the applicants been subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?   2.     If so, having regard to the amounts of compensation awarded to the applicants in the civil proceedings (see Kopylov v. Russia , no.   3933/04, §§   143-49, 29 July 2010), did the applicants subsequently lose their status as victims of a violation of Article   3, within the meaning of Article   34 of the Convention?   3.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaints under Article 3, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?   APPENDIX     No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant name date of birth place of residence Represented by   62798/09 06/11/2009 Artur Germanovich IVANOV 22/07/1977 Novocheboksarsk   Aleksey Vladimirovich GLUKHOV   33184/11 01/04/2011 Aleksey Vsevolodovich GAVRILOV 15/03/1971 Dagestanskaya