CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 novembre 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 } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sC8636342 { 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 } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .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 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sB217F55D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sC4FC489C { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:1.7pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sECE322C2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:1.65pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .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 } .s14C40B6F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:0.95pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .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 } .sF281C004 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:7.1pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .s898DAE93 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s299B0C57 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sA0B2759 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sC4A995C6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; font-size:8pt } .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 } .sFA13EEC2 { height:148.15pt } .s268BE78A { height:13.7pt } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }   Communicated on 3 November 2016   THIRD SECTION Application no 39797/07 Aleksandr Nikolayevich CHERNIGIN against Russia and 8 other applications (see list appended) STATEMENT OF FACTS A.     The circumstances of the cases The applicants are all Russian nationals living in various regions of the Russian Federation. Between 2006 and 2014 they were prosecuted for and subsequently convicted of different criminal offences. Their personal details appear in the Appendix. The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. All the applicants were first arrested by the police on suspicion of having committed different criminal offences and brought to police stations. Shortly after, they made confession statements (« явкa с повинной »). In each case, after that statement, an arrest record was drawn up, the applicant received status of a criminal suspect and was informed of all his rights, including the right to remain silent, the right to a lawyer and the privilege against self-incrimination. Later on, certain applicants were provided with a lawyer (appointed or of their own choosing). Mr Lozovskiy (application no. 21063/08) then refused to testify. Mr Salnikov (application no. 25292/10) and Mr Arestov (application no. 56592/12) retracted their confessions when interviewed as suspects in the presence of their respective lawyers. The rest of the applicants reiterated their confession statements in the presence of a lawyer. At trial, all the applicants denied wholly or in part their confessions, arguing that they had been obtained by the police in the absence of a lawyer. Their arguments were rejected by the domestic courts for two main reasons. First, the domestic legislation does not require a lawyer’s presence for “surrender with confession”. Second, the applicants’ confession statements were confirmed by other, circumstantial, evidence. The domestic courts’ judgments contain more or less detailed analysis in this respect (for more information see the Appendix). All the applicants further complain about physical and/or psychological pressure put on them by the police and their unsuccessful attempts to complain about it. Mr Chernigin, Nikonov and Golubev (applications nos. 39797/07, 60875/11 and 46775/14) also indicate that at the time of their initial questioning by the police which resulted in their confession they were severely intoxicated. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice The relevant domestic law and practice are summarised in the case of Turbylev v. Russia ( Turbylev v. Russia , no. 4722/09, §§ 46-56, 6 October 2015). COMPLAINTS The applicants complain under Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention in conjunction with Article 6 § 1 that their rights of defence in criminal proceedings were violated, as their initial confessions – which formed the basis of their criminal conviction – were obtained in breach of their right to a lawyer. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against them, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention? In particular, were the applicants’ defence rights and the principle of fair proceedings (as enshrined in Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention) respected, given their submissions that the domestic courts convicted them, inter alia , on the basis of confessions they had made in the absence of a legal representative?   In order to answer the question, the Government are requested to provide the following information:   (a)     As regards the applicants’ arrest by the police   1.     Were any of the applicants in a vulnerable state at the moment of their arrest (e.g. intoxicated)? The Government are requested to provide copies of the applicants’ medical examination immediately after their arrests, if any.   2.     Are there specific requirements/formalities the police should comply with, in order to ensure the admissibility at trial of a confession statement made by a person arrested by the police?   3.     When (date and time) did each of the applicants first have access to a lawyer? Were these lawyers of the applicants’ own choosing or State appointed lawyers? In the latter case, was this State appointed lawyer chosen by an investigator or sent by a Bar association?   4.     Did any of the applicants waive their right to a lawyer when making their confession statements and if so, was such waiver established in an unequivocal manner and attended by minimum procedural safeguards ( Sejdovic v. Italy [GC], no. 56581/00, ECHR 2006 ‑ II; Talat Tunç v. Turkey , no. 32432/96, § 59, 27 March 2007; and Jones v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 30900/02, 9 September 2003)? Was the applicants’ right to a lawyer restricted and if so, on what basis and what were the compelling reasons thereof?   The Government are requested to provide copies of the register of persons escorted to police stations ( книга/журнал учета лиц, доставленных в отдел внутренних дел ) and of detained persons (реестр лиц, подвергнутых задержанию) for the dates of detention as claimed by the applicants, records of the applicants’ initial questioning by the police and copies of other relevant documents indicating the timing of their arrest, their first confession statement given to the police, information that they had been notified about their right to be legally represented, the appointment of a lawyer and other relevant documents.   (b)     As regards the pre-trial (investigation) stage   5.     During the pre-trial investigation, have each of the applicants:   -     confirmed or retracted his initial confession statement; and/or -     refused to testify; and/or -     actively cooperated with the investigative authorities; and/or -     suggested an alternative version of the events by providing a new testimony, and if so, whether and what investigative steps had been taken by the investigative authorities to verify this new version?   6.     When the applicants first retracted their confession statements, did it take place before or after they had access to a lawyer and in particular a lawyer of their own choosing?   The Government are requested to provide a copy of the relevant documents and indicate in particular whether each time (investigative activity concerned) a lawyer, and what lawyer (State appointed or of own choosing) was present.   (c)     As regards the trial and appeal stages   7.     When did the applicants first challenge the admissibility of their confession statements before the trial courts? Did they have a possibility/ obligation to raise this issue at the preliminary hearing? Does the legislation provide for a possibility for the trial court to exclude inadmissible evidence from the body of evidence?   8.     Did the applicants have a genuine opportunity to challenge the admissibility of their confession statements? In particular, were the police officers present when the applicants had made their confession statements questioned by the trial court or did the applicants have a possibility to present an alternative version of the events and did the trial court take measures to examine it?   9.     Did the domestic courts give an appropriate answer to the applicants’ requests to declare their confession statements inadmissible and did they duly reason their decisions to maintain them in the files (see Vanfuli v.   Russia , no. 24885/05, § 104, 3 November 2011, and Nechto v. Russia , no.   24893/05, § 111, 24 January 2012)?   10.     To what extent were the applicants’ convictions based on other evidence (direct and/or circumstantial) (see Pakshayev v.   Russia , no.   1377/04, §§ 29-34, 13 March 2014)? APPENDIX No. Application no.   Lodged on Applicant name Date of birth Place of residence Nationality Represented by Details about arrest, Confession given, Arrest record drawn up Location   (police station where the applicant was arrested) Confession reiterated/retracted Date of the trial and appeal courts’ judgments   1.   39797/07   06/08/2007   Aleksandr Nikolayevich CHERNIGIN 05/07/1988   Kostroma, Kostroma Region   Russian     Arrested at unspecified time after midnight on 12/07/2006   Confession statement at 3.45 a.m. on 12/07/2006   Arrest record drawn up at 4.15 a.m. on 12/07/2006     Zavolzhskiy police department, Kostroma ( ОВД Заволжского округа города Кострома, Костромская область )   Reiterated on 12/07/2006 (in the applicant’s arrest record; an interview as a suspect in the presence of a State-appointed lawyer Mr K.), on 19/07/2006 (in an interview as an accused in the presence of the same lawyer)   Retracted on 21/12/2006 (in an interview as an accused in the presence of a lawyer of own choosing Mr Kab.)     Dmitrovskiy District Court of Kostroma 19/02/2007   Kostroma Regional Court 05/04/2007   2.   21063/08   24/03/2008   Robert Aleksandrovich LOZOVSKIY 09/09/1963   Pyatigorsk, Stavropol Region   Russian     Nver Sarkisovich GASPARYAN     Arrested at around 7.00 p.m. on 16/08/2006   Confession statement at around 1.00 a.m. on 17/08/2006   Arrest record drawn up at around 10.00 a.m. on 17/08/2006     Police department, Yessentuki, Stavropol Region ( ОВД по г. Ессентуки, Ставропольский край )   On unspecified date during an interview as a suspect and as an accused the applicant refused to testify   Yessentuki Town Court of the Stavropol Region 10/07/2008   Stavropol Regional Court 17/09/2008     3.   25292/10   07/04/2010   Sergey Nikolayevich SALNIKOV 08/10/1972   Yelets, Lipetsk Region   Russian     Arrested at 10.30 a.m. on 26/02/2009   Confession statement at 4.30 p.m. on 26/02/2009   Arrest record drawn up at 5.13 p.m. on 27/02/2009 (a lawyer present)     Police department, Vuktyl, Komi Republic ( ОВД г. Вуктыл, Республика Коми )   Retracted on 28/02/2009 (during an interview as a suspect in the presence of a lawyer)   Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 03/11/2009   Supreme Court of the Russian Federation 11/01/2010     4.   60875/11   13/09/2011   Artem Andreyevich NIKONOV 28/08/1987   Nadvoitsy, Republic of Kareliya   Russian     Arrested at 5.00 p.m. on 24/11/2009   Confession statement on 24/11/2009   Arrest record drawn up at unspecified time on 25/11/2009     Prionezhskiy police department, Petrozavodsk, Republic of Kareliya ( Прионежский РОВД г. Петрозаводск, Республика Карелия )   Reiterated on 25/11/2009 (during an interview as a suspect in the presence of a lawyer), 02/12/2009, 04/12/2009 (during interviews as an accused in the presence of a lawyer but added that killed the victim spontaneously)   Retracted on 17/03/2010 (during an interview as an accused in the presence of a lawyer)   Supreme Court of the Republic of Kareliya 20/04/2011   Supreme Court of the Russian Federation 20/07/2011     5.   23731/12   30/03/2012   Roman Nikolayevich RYNDIN 08/02/1978   Kursk, Kursk Region   Russian     Arrested at around 9.00 p.m. on 14/09/2010   Confession statement on 14/09/2010   Arrest record drawn up at 11.55 p.m. on 14/09/2010 (was arrested on suspicion of committing an administrative offence, later this arrest was declared unlawful)   Arrest record as a criminal suspect drawn up at unspecified time on 15/09/2010       Police department, Kurchatov, Kursk Region ( МОВД Курчатовский Курской области ).   no information       Kurchatovskiy Town Court of the Kursk Region 02/11/2011   Kursk Regional Court 27/12/2011     6.   56592/12   08/08/2012   Roman Valeryevich ARESTOV 17/09/1975   Valuyki, Belgorod Region   Russian     Arrested at 3.00 p.m. on 07/08/2011   Confession statement at 11.00 a.m. on 08/08/2011   Arrest record drawn up at around 6.00 p.m. on 08/08/2011 (a lawyer present)         Police department no.1, Belgorod ( отдел полиции № 1 УМВД по г. Белгород Белгородской области )   Retracted on 08/08/2011 (during an interview as a suspect and a reconstruction of the crime in the presence of a State-appointed lawyer), 09/08/2011 and 16/09/2011 (during an interview as an accused in the presence of another State appointed lawyer)   Oktyabrskiy District Court of Belgorod 27/12/2011   Belgorod Regional Court 15/02/2012   7.   2509/13 28/11/2012   Aleksandr Ilyich LOPATIN 26/02/1960   Norilsk, Krasnoyarsk Region   Russian     Arrested at 5.00 p.m. on 01/02/2012   Confession statement on 01/02/2012   Arrest record drawn up at 6.00 p.m. on 02/02/2012     District police officer’s office in the administration of the village of Sologon, Uzhurskiy district, Krasnoyarsk Region ( кабинет участкового инспектора в Администрации с. Сологон Ужурского района Красноярского края ).     Reiterated on 02/02/2012 (during a reconstruction of the crime and an interview as a suspect in the presence of a State-appointed lawyer Mr   Pestryakov), on 09/02/2012 (during an interview as an accused in the presence of the same lawyer), on 27/06/2012 (during an interview as an accused in the presence of a lawyer of own choosing Mr   T., the applicant added that killed the victim by recklessness)     Uzhurskiy District Court of the Krasnoyarsk Region 08/02/2013   Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 11/07/2013     8.   33769/14   07/04/2014   Vitaliy Sergeyevich POTOKI 27/01/1982   Ukhta, Komi Republic   Russian     Arrested at unspecified time on 20/06/2013   Confession statement at 9.00 a.m. on 21/06/2013   Arrest record drawn up at unspecified time on 21/06/2013     Police department, Krasnokamskiy district, Republic of Bashkortostan ( OВД по Краснокамскому району Республики Башкортостан )   Reiterated on 21/06/2013 (during an interview as a suspect, a reconstruction of the crime and an interview as an accused in the presence of a State ‑ appointed lawyer Ms   Ty.)   Retracted on 20/08/2013 (during an interview as an accused, refused to testify, in the presence of a lawyer Ms   Akh.)     Krasnokamskiy District Court of the Republic of Bashkortostan 31/10/2013   Supreme Court of Bashkortostan 15/01/2014     9.   46775/14   02/06/2014   Mikhail Viktorovich GOLUBEV 04/10/1984   Ognenny, Vologda Region   Russian     Arrested at unspecified time on 20/11/2012   Confession statement between around 2 p.m. and around 6   p.m. on 20/11/2012   Arrest record drawn up at unspecified time on 20/11/2012 (confession confirmed for the record in the presence of a lawyer Ms Muranskaya)     Police department, Zima, Irkutsk Region ( Зиминский ОВД Иркутской области )   Reiterated on 20/11/2012, 21/11/2012, 21/05/2013 and 22/07/2013 (during an interview as a suspect, a reconstruction of the crime, an interview as an accused in the presence of a lawyer)   Retracted on 25/07/2013 (during an interview as an accused in the presence of a lawyer)     Irkutsk Regional Court 25/09/2013   Supreme Court of the Russian Federation 26/12/2013