CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 juillet 2017

.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 } .s72C8F48C { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s71D3093B { width:100.52%; border-collapse:collapse } .sA9FF7812 { width:3.6%; 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 } .sD0CC3F5A { width:8.08%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s9B62CB20 { width:10.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s389B4756 { width:11.28%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s6D452D74 { width:9.96%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE512A940 { font-family:Arial; color:#474747 } .s1B02AA71 { width:16.5%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s105C5724 { width:16.44%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s3CE7E733 { width:8.22%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sB351C6B6 { width:15.18%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s54D5B257 { width:3.6%; 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 } .s360C4469 { width:8.08%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s3FB26BC5 { width:10.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB90A4095 { width:11.28%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF5AD65B5 { width:9.96%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB217F55D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sFD79B74F { width:16.5%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4FC2C2A5 { width:16.44%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sCEC8787C { width:8.22%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sCE29FB7B { width:15.18%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s3050089D { height:83.2pt }   Communicated on 12 July 2017   THIRD SECTION Application no 11134/08 Svetlana Vasilyevna MAZURINA against Russia and 4 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. The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. Between 2005 and 2013 the applicants were confronted with the police officers during a police inquiry, identity checks, or road traffic situations. In all cases except for Mr Shilov (application no. 60333/10) confrontation led to the applicants being arrested and taken to the police premises. In all cases except for Mr Shilov (application no. 60333/10) the police officers acknowledged that they used physical force and/or special means (handcuffs) against the applicants. According to the applicants, the degree of the force used against them was disproportionate to their resistance. The applicants’ injuries of different types and severity are confirmed by medical certificates. In all cases the police officers also sustained injuries. In all cases except for Mr Shilov (application no. 60333/10) the applicants’ complaints about the police ill-treatment were rejected on the ground that their injuries were caused to them only in response to their resistance. In Mr Shilov’s case complaints about ill-treatment were not examined at all. All applicants were subsequently prosecuted for and convicted of use of violence against police officers, except for Ms Mazurina (application no.   11134/08) who was first convicted but then acquitted. The applicants’ personal details as well as other relevant information about the circumstances of their respective arrests and their attempts to complain about ill-treatment at domestic level are summarised in the Appendix. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice 1.     The Police Act Sections 18-20 of the Police Act 2011 (Federal Law no. 3-FZ of 7   February 2011) provide that -     a police officer may use physical force, special means or a weapon, -     when using physical force, special means or a weapon a police officer shall act depending on the situation, character and degree of dangerousness of the person, character and degree of resistance offered, at the same time the police officer shall endeavour to minimize the damage caused, -     a police officer is empowered to use physical force, including martial arts, to stop a criminal or administrative offence from being committed, arrest persons who have committed a criminal or administrative offence or overcome resistance to a lawful order, if non-violent methods are insufficient to ensure the discharge of his police duties; -     a police officer shall ensure that a person injured receives first aid, -     where the physical force used results in damage to health, and where special means or a weapon are used, a police officer shall submit a report about the use of physical force, special means or a weapon to his supervisor within twenty-four hours. The Police Act 1991 (Federal Law no. 1026-I of 18 April 1991) and respective by-laws contained similar provisions. 2.     Other by-laws The Instruction on the police officers’ execution of their obligations and rights in the police departments of the Ministry of the Interior after the persons are taken to the police custody (approved by the order no. 389 of the Ministry of the Interior of the Russian Federation on 30 April 2012) provides that -     a police officer on duty in the police custody shall inform his superior about all the cases when a person arrested and taken to the police custody has visible wounds, injuries or is in a state that requires urgent medical intervention; -     a police officer shall call an ambulance or take a person to a nearby hospital; -     a police officer shall find out the reasons and circumstances of the injuries sustained by the person concerned. In case the person concerned reports about violent actions that resulted in his injuries then the police officer shall receive a criminal complaint from the person, if not, then he shall draw up a reasoned report and register it in the Register of the criminal complaints. The instruction repeated the rules that were in force before its adoption. COMPLAINTS The applicants complain under Article 3 of the Convention about the excessive force used in the course of their confrontation with the police and about the lack of an effective investigation in this respect. The applicants also complain under Article 13 of the Convention that they did not have an effective domestic remedy at their disposal. QUESTIONS to the parties 1.     Having regard to the injuries found on the applicants after their confrontation with the police or the time spent by them in State custody, were the applicants subjected to torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention (see Kuzmenko v. Russia , no.   18541/04, § 43, 21 December 2010, Yudina v. Russia , no. 52327/08, §§   69-70, 10 July 2012, Borbála Kiss v. Hungary , no. 59214/11, § 36, 26   June 2012, Réti and Fizli v. Hungary , no. 31373/11, § 34, 25 September 2012, Darraj v. France , no. 34588/07, § 43, 4 November 2010, Douet v.   France , no. 16705/10, § 37, 3 October 2013, Dembele v. Switzerland , no.   74010/11, § 47, 24 September 2013, Shishkovi v. Bulgaria , no.   17322/04, § 32, 25 March 2010)?   2.     Did the authorities carry out an effective official investigation into the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment in the course of their confrontation with the police officers and/or arrest as required by Article 3 of the Convention (see Labita v.   Italy [GC], no.   26772/95, § 131, ECHR 2000 ‑ IV, Lyapin v. Russia , no.   46956/09, §§   125-40, 24 July 2014)?   3.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy or a combination of remedies for their complaints under Article 3 of the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention? APPENDIX No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant name date of birth place of residence nationality represented by Details about arrest, location of the police station, arrest record (if applicable) Report drawn up by the police officers about the circumstances of the arrest and use of force Medical evidence: date of examination, document type (date of the document) (description of injuries)   Applicants’ complaints about ill ‑ treatment to the domestic authorities (first complaint, latest refusal to open a criminal case and reasons for refusal, the latest domestic courts’ decision under Art. 125 CCP and reasoning) Date when criminal proceedings against the applicant into the use of violence against police officers were opened Applicants’ trial and appeal courts’ judgments and the results of the examination of their allegations of ill ‑ treatment, if any     11134/08 11/02/2008   Svetlana Vasilyevna MAZURINA 17/07/1962   Vladivostok   Russian   23/04/2005 (at around 09.00 a.m.)   Arrest at home by two police officers in plain clothes in the course of inquiry into the arsons of flats   Police department, city of B.Kamen, Primorskiy Region ( ОВД ЗАТО г.   Б.   Камень, Приморский край )   23/04/2005 (at around 09.45 a.m.) Taken to the hospital where stayed till 04/05/2005   No information 23/04/2005 Ambulance certificate (bruises on the face, brain concussion)   27/04/2005 Forensic medical examination act no. 477 (examination conducted on the basis of the documents) (brain concussion, bruises on the left eye and scalp)   24/04/2005 First complaint to the prosecutor   03/04/2009 Latest refusal to open a criminal case (police officers did not act unlawfully, the applicant could have been injured when the police officer used physical force to repress the applicant’s unlawful acts in respect of him, and due to fall from her own height)   15/07/2009 Shkotskiy District Court of the Primorskiy Region (the applicant’s complaints were examined in the course of criminal proceedings against her, that is why the investigator lawfully referred in the refusal to open a criminal case to the findings of the criminal proceedings against the applicant)   13/05/2005   18/12/2008 Shkotskiy District Court of the Primorskiy Region   Convicted of use of violence against a public officer, but exempted from criminal liability as she had committed a crime in a state of insanity   26/02/2009 Primorskiy Regional Court   Convicted of use of violence against a public officer, but exempted from criminal liability as she had committed a crime in a state of insanity   (the applicant’s injuries did not exclude the fact that she had committed a crime, she could have been injured when the victim – a   police officer ‑ repressed the applicant’s having committed a crime against him)   15/01/2010 Presidium of the Primorskiy Regional Court   Quashed the applicant’s conviction and acquitted her     62003/08 24/09/2008   Aleksey Valentinovich KURSISH 20/09/1960   Lermontov   Russian     25/07/2007 (at 11.30 p.m.)   Arrest outdoors by two traffic police officers on suspicion of having committed a road traffic offence   Police department, city of Lermontov, Stavropol Region ( ОВД по г.   Лермонтову Ставропольского края ) 26/07/2007 (at 04.00 a.m.) Released       26/07/2007   26/07/2007 Medical certificate of the ambulance (haematoma of the soft issues of both shoulders, abrasion and hyperaemia on the left wrist joint, hyperaemia on the right wrist joint, contusion of the small of the back, soft tissue bruises on the neck)   27/07/2007 Medical certificate from the hospital (26/09/2007) (osteochondritis, slipped height of the spinal discs, spinal discs protrusion) 26/07/2007 Medical certificate (haematomas of the soft issues of both shoulders, abrasions and hyperaemia on the both wrist joints, contusion of the small of the back, soft tissue bruises on the neck)   28/09/2007 Forensic medical examination report no.   225 (examination conducted on the basis of the documents, requested by the investigator on 28/09/2007) (bruises on both shoulders, redness on both wrist joints) 30/07/2007 First complaint to the investigative committee   No information about further developments   The applicant raised his claim of ill ‑ treatment in the criminal proceedings against him   03/08/2007   21/08/2007 Justice of the Peace of the 7th Court Circuit of Pyatigorsk of the Stavropol Region   Administrative proceedings against the applicant into the alleged refusal to undergo a medical examination in respect of alcoholic intoxication were terminated due to the lack of the event of crime   28/12/2007 Lermontovskiy Town Court of the Stavropol Region 23/04/2007 Stavropol Regional Court   Convicted of insult and use of violence against a public officer   (the physical force and handcuffs were used as the applicant did not comply with the police officers’ orders, tried to run away, insulted and beat the police officer)               57301/09 01/10/2009   Aleksandr Konstantinovich CHERKASHEN 25/08/1971   Pyatigorsk   Russian     09/05/2007 (at around 06.00 p.m.)   Arrest outdoors by two police officers in police uniforms in the course of identity check   Police department, Pyatigorsk ( ОВД по г. Пятигорск )   09/05/2007 (after around 09.00 p.m.) Released       No information 09/05/2007 Certificate of the hospital (18/07/2008) (soft tissue bruise on the small of the back)   12/05/2007 Medical card (kidneys contusion, blood in urine, abrasions on the back, spine contusion)   23/05/2007 Forensic medical examination report no.   468 (examination conducted on the basis of the documents, was requested by the prosecutor) (right kidney contusion, abrasions on the back, spine contusion) May 2008 First complaint to the investigative committee   02/08/2008 Latest refusal to open a criminal case (the applicant tried to run away when was asked by the police officers to come with them to the police van, therefore the physical force was used against the applicant, in the police van the applicant kicked the police officer in the hand, therefore the applicant was handcuffed, the police officers’ actions were lawful)     01/06/2007   10/06/2009 Pyatigorsk Town Court 09/09/2009 Stavropol Regional Court   Convicted of use of violence against a public officer     (the domestic courts held that they examined the applicant’s version that he had been beaten up by the police officers, and dismissed it with reference to the refusal to open a criminal case against the police officers)       60333/10 16/09/2010   Yevgeniy Valentinovich SHILOV 08/08/1980   Priverkh   Russian   (the applicant changed his surname from “Shilo” to “Shilov”, that is confirmed by the certificate issued on 22/06/2015)   07/08/2009 (at around 02.00 -02.30 p.m.)   Was approached by three police officers (one in a uniform, two others in plain clothes) on the basis of ongoing inquiry of the complaint of Mr B. against the applicant, identity check     Train station “Mozyndor”, v. Mozyndor, Udorskiy District, Komi Republic ( ж/д станция «Мозындор», пос.   Мозындор, Удорский район, Республика Коми )   Was not arrested No information 08/08/2009 Forensic medical examination act no.   20/177 ‑ 09/177-09   (bruises on the left side of the back of the head, above right eyebrow, left cheekbone, more than 15   bruises on the front right surface of the neck, two bruises of the front surface of the stomach, right shoulder joint, left hip, abrasions on the left ear, front right surface of the neck, both hands) 07/08/2009 First complaint to the police   20/11/2009 Prosecutor’s reply that the applicant’s criminal complaint was to be examined by the trial court 16/10/2009   01/04/2010 Udorskiy District Court of the Komi Republic 25/05/2010 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic   Convicted of use of violence against a public officer   (the courts dismissed the applicant’s complaint of ill-treatment, as this issue could not have been the subject of the trial, the courts were not empowered to institute criminal proceedings)                       4732/14 31/12/2013   Sergey Aleksandrovich SAVKIN 10/03/1988   Dobrun   Russian     30/07/2012 (at around 12.30 a.m.)   Arrested outdoors by the traffic police on suspicion of having committed a road traffic offence   Police department, Volodarskiy district, Bryanks ( отделение полиции Володарского района города Брянска )   30/07/2012 (at 05.30 a.m.) Administrative arrest record drawn up 31/07/2012 (at 04.40 a.m.) Released       30/07/2012 Report about the crime   30/07/2012 Register of the patients no. 20 (wound of the soft tissues of the right low leg)   01/08/2012 Forensic medical examination act no. 655 (23/08/2012) (bruises on the face, chest, left shoulder, haemorrhage beneath conjunctiva of the right eye, abrasions on the neck, right ear, face, left shoulder-blade, wound of the soft tissues of the right low leg)   03/09/2012 Forensic medical examination no. 836 (examination conducted on the basis of the documents) (19/09/2012) (bruises on the face, chest, left shoulder, haemorrhage beneath conjunctiva of the right eye, abrasions on the neck, right ear, face, left shoulder-blade, wound of the soft tissues of the right low leg)   16/08/2012 Extract from the applicant’s medical card no. 3286 (infected wound of the soft tissues of the right low leg, bruise of the right eyelid, subconjunctival haemorrhage on the right, concussion of retina on the right, closed craniocerebral injury, light brain concussion) 31/07/2012 First complaint to the investigative committee   26/09/2012 Refusal to open a criminal case (the applicant refused to identify himself, tried to run away, thus the police officer lawfully handcuffed the applicant and later applied physical force to suppress the applicant)   10/09/2013 Bryansk Regional Court (dismissed the applicant’s complaint as the applicant had already been convicted) 31/08/2012     30/07/2012 Justice of the Peace of the 69th Court Circuit of the Volodarskiy District of Bryansk   Convicted of refusal to undergo a medical examination in respect of alcoholic intoxication   09/01/2013 Volodarskiy District Court of Bryansk 19/03/2013 Bryansk Regional Court 03/07/2013 Bryansk Regional Court   Convicted of use of violence against a public officer   (the applicant was intoxicated, had no identity documents, refused to identify himself and tried to run away, thus the police officer lawfully handcuffed the applicant and later applied physical force to suppress the applicant, the courts referred to the refusal to open a criminal case against a police officer)